The American Spectator

home
ADVERTISEMENT
Reader Mail
Print Email
Text Size

Reader Mail

Doozie and Harriet

Nomination hearings continue. Also: The Rudy in our future. Allah and the Cardinal. Democrat revival. Diesel mixes. American Stein. Plus much more.
p> MIERED IN WOE br> Re: George Neumayr’s Conformist Credentials : /p> p>Even great Presidents make mistakes — like when Reagan appointed the supposedly conservative Sandra Day O’Connor. I make this statement to point out to the conservatives and Republicans that think that no matter who Bush nominates, they will be excellent for the Supreme Court. The real issue is not whether this woman is qualified, but that conservatives have been suckered before by stealth nominees who may have been conservative at one time, but who ended up taking the big left turn when they got on the bench. Why should we keep on gambling when there are sure winners out there? We have played this game before and are not willing to take any more chances. It is absurd to gamble on an unknown when there are so many qualified rock-solid conservatives out there to choose from. This appointment is a sign of weakness and a “safe” choice by Bush in order to avoid a real fight, and to help liberal Republicans from having to stand up and be counted by preserving the judicial filibuster. Those Republicans that want to keep the status quo and not have a real fight for the Supreme Court, thereby preserving the judicial filibuster are just spineless cowards who need to be voted out of office. br> — Anthony Sorrentino br> Enterprise, Alabama /p> p> Well, George, you get an “A” for originality. After all, how best to outshine your fellow travelers, Will, Kristol, and Coulter, than by turning the argument on its head by calling Miers an establishment elitist. Bravo! What intellectual dexterity. Methinks you are a bit too fixated on Miers’s role with the ABA. While I agree that the ABA is mostly inimical to conservative perspectives (hence my refusal to join for 25 years), nonetheless you’d be surprised at the number of conservative lawyers who actively participate. Why I bet even Scalia, Thomas, and Roberts have had associations with it at one time or another. It’s sadly part of what one has to do if one wants to be a “player.” Come on George, what else could she as chairman of the rules committee do? Ignore the requests of her colleagues because of her ideological opposition to them? This is a professional association, after all. How many media forums have you protested and walked out on because the tone was anti-conservative? And give me a break on the campaign donations; you think she’s the first conservative that has had to play this game? I could say that as part of the “elite media,” you yourself are suspect; after all, the vast majority of your “colleagues” are shameless liberals. But you and others have managed to withstand the liberal media hegemony, so cut Miers some slack. Maybe she’s as stalwart as you are. br> — A. DiPentima /p>
Page: 1 2 3   Last ›

topics:
Taxes, Hillary Clinton, Social Security, Religion, Islam, Abortion, Books, Hollywood, Constitution, Law, Supreme Court, Iraq, Israel, NATO, Conservatism, Immigration, Medicare

Letter to the Editor

Related Articles

More Articles From Reader Mail

http://spectator.org/archives/2005/10/10/doozie-and-harriet

ADVERTISEMENT

SPONSORED LINKS

FLASHBACK TO: 1995

Clip of the Day

ADVERTISEMENT