"Robert Bork Says Bush Can No Longer Be Trusted"

What I want to know is when could he be trusted?

People:

Beware. This nomination may be Karl Rove's "Bait and Switch!"

The White House knows that this candidate is unqualified. If defeated by the Senate, then Bush (Rove) may nominate Alberto "Mr. Torture" Gonzalez to be the Associate Justice. Then, God help us all as he will definitely legislate from the bench ("The Geneva Conventions are quaint.")

Bush could then just say, "Hey, I gave you a moderate and you rejected her. So here's a staunch conservative."

The Democrats would then look like they are simply obstructionist.

As bad as Ms. Miers is, I would much prefer her to Alberto.

The way to defeat this bait and switch is to swallow hard and just accept Ms. Miers and her incompetence and cronyism.

This bait and switch may be Karl Rove's (final?) revenge on the world.

This is no surprise.

Everybody with a brain has known for some time that Bush's own people would start abandoning him before 2006 (/08) if they are to have a chance.

Lo and behold, the abandonment has begun.

Don't be suckered into thinking the Repugs are all okay again just because they are abandoning Bush.

The stink goes waaay past Bush. All the way to the rotten core.

Kick them out!!!!

I disagree, MrBlueSky - the Republicans are the ones that are making the most fuss about how unqualified the chimps lawyer is for the SC.... I haven't heard much at all from dem quarters --- Karl Rove's "brilliance" is way over hyped, and I have a sneaking suspicion that he had nothing to do with pushing Miers... all Chimpy's doing, Rove's job now that he's been caught with his hand in the treason jar is to sell Miers to the conservative base - which isn't buying. And no, we shouldn't have to swallow hard and take Miers or get stuck with "I ♥ torture" Gonzales. The repubs are going to sink Miers, the dems should grab some balls and sink the next unqualified hack bush nominates.

If we knock one over, we could knock a second one over.

The real deal is this... We have a right to get straight answers from people who are applying for the job of Supreme Court justice.

The Conservatives all laid down for John Roberts because he has far right credentials. And the media, the losers, just went along with the talking points: "He's so nice." "He loves the law." "He has lots of support." "He will be approved."

Now, we are seeing someone that the conservatives aren't so sure about because her only credential is that she LOOOOOOVES her boss. Now the conservatives are starting to demand that they be allowed to check the nominee out. Democrats just couldn't do it.

But if the COnservatives are willing to show that there might be a problem with a Bush nominee... then we have an opportunity to call others into question.

My question is how does one get rid of a judge? Do they just die out or is there any way to have them removed for whatever reason?

#6, my question, too! As far as I'm concerned, if a non-elected white house resident puts a judge in to the Supreme Court, they should be stopped at the door, and politely asked to go home. Impeach and undo his mess.

I have only this to say regarding the mass exodus from Gee Bush is a Really Swell Guy City on the part of the Con(men)-servatives: I hope to hell this isn't what brings Bush down. Otherwise we'd better pray (hell, I don't pray--but I will. For this. To every stupid deity ever devised by man...) like a M07#3R F*:

It appears the majority of republicans are not very happy about bushes latest Supreme Court nominee, Harriet Miers. This is very unusual, given their lock step history in the last few years. He seems to have taken a very unpopular stand on this one, while stubbornly telling us all to “trust” him.

It occurred to me that maybe bush has forgotten the rules, does he possibly think he is actually the real president? Rumor has it Cheney is extremely unhappy about bush’s choice. Very interesting.
It may be that bush has done the one thing “they” believed he wouldn’t do, try to think for himself and actually make decisions for the country (“they” being those who propped him up and supported his election campaign, also those who’ve actually been calling the shots for the last 5 years). He seems to be cutting the strings, if you know what I mean.

Maybe he’s trying to make amends for what happened on his watch during Katrina. Then again, does he just want an insider in his back pocket when the impeachment starts? Who knows?

Got me to thinking, how dirty these people can be, vindictive too. If I were bush I’d be a bit worried now that I wasn’t following the script. He knows what happens when people do that. Hummm, and from one of their own no less.

To be honest, with all that I’ve seen happen and change since bush was selected president, I’m surprised more people aren’t outraged and out to get him. Apparently he is well protected, as any American President should be! However, if I were bush, knowing what he probably knows, I’d be a little nervous about breaking the rules. Then again, you know bush, nearsighted as they come. The next 3 years should be very interesting.

W has been so insulated from reality by his own handlers, he doesn't even realize that other Conservatives have aspirations for attaining power and money too.

Sort of the emperor has no clothes syndrome happening before our eyes.

He got so into believing that he was in complete control of a wonderfully functioning Administration, that he has missed the fact that there are basic principles in the Republican Party which must be met.

Yes, you can lie, cheat, steal and get away with it often. Yes, you can hold grand press conferences and repeatedly come off sounding like an idiot. Yes, you can be on vacation while your nation burns. Republican politicians don't care about those things.

But, you cannot undermine the corrupt lifers in your party. They have agendas. If you go about your life thinking you can just tell your party to "trust me" when you have proven to be absolutely untrustworthy, they will stop you.

Now, what happens next? I think the former Bushies in the Congress are going to tell him "NO" on Harriet Miers.

Then, they are going to take him out behind the shed, whip his ass severely, show him who is in charge, and tell him who he may nominate.

The fun will be, if W doesn't get it and still tries to carry on "his way".

The Republicans in Congress have refused to impeach and convict George.

So, regardless of their opinion on Ms. Miers they're not fit to be re-elected.

We need some "Impeach" stickers which can be placed on cars right next to a "W" sticker. "Impeach W" would be pretty neat. The owner might not even notice the extra sticker that's been added. LOL

Re: Bork

Even a stopped clock is right sometimes.

MarkH #11,

Impeachment is a very big deal. Sure, the Republicans made a mockery of America and everything it should stand for by screaming "impeachment" over a president having sex. But, we're above that, aren't we?

There would be a lot of work, money, and time needed to prove impeachable offenses by Bush.
It's not really a healthy thing for the nation.

I know, I know - Bush is not a healthy thing for the nation either.

And yes, those of us not brain washed by Rupert Murdoch and Pat Robertson must do our best to keep truth out in front of all the creepy "conservative" spin.

But, while it is not time for celebration, I think we can safetly say a lot of the bad guys are losing their holds on America.

Bush might be self destructing.

In AA..where Bush belongs, most people before they get sober have alienated everybody they know. AA teaches that even if you are sober and haven't had treatment, the behavior is the same. They teach the alcoholics to take responsibility for their actions and to tell the truth. I think Bush is pissing off everybody because of untreated alcoholism. It is amazing he could rise so high. They usually lose their home, family, friends and jobs. It is a pattern that is in lots of AA stories. Been to lots of meetings...one of the best things I ever did for myself.

Check this out....I hope to GOD this passes.....http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c109:H.R.1070:

...ThomNYC said on 10/11/2005 @ 10:56am PT...

"MarkH #11,
Impeachment is a very big deal. Sure, the Republicans made a mockery of America and everything it should stand for by screaming "impeachment" over a president having sex. But, we're above that, aren't we?"

Above what, upholding the law? I don't think any of us here who hope for an impeachment see it as anything like the political smear the Republicans did.

I know the House Republicans thought they were doing the right thing and many or most were shocked when their Republican peers in the Senate didn't finish the job. It just goes to show how those people can be led to act like sheep.

In this case (against Bush) there are a zillion things he's done which are clearly illegal and impeachable offenses. Personally, I'd prefer he be torn to shreds by wild dogs on the mall, but we can't always get what we want, can we?

"There would be a lot of work, money, and time needed to prove impeachable offenses by Bush."

How much is your freedom worth?
Staying free is hard work.

"It's not really a healthy thing for the nation."

Who says? Is it healthy to let a little dictator run amok?

"Bush might be self destructing."

At least he could have the decency to do that much for America.

MarkH, thank you for disagreeing respectfully. I admit to understanding your passion about this.

No. We are not above upholding the law.

I do doubt that Republicans thought they were doing the right thing, as you suggest.

In this case against Bush, yes there are many immoral and/or unethical things probably easily proven. Illegal??? I understand that many believe it should be easy to prove illegal activity here. I cautiously say - not so sure.

Yes, our freedom is worth a lot. And, they have succeeded in eroding the liberties of us all beyond belief. It is disturbing and puzzling to think how much damage has been done. I don't discount a fight. I only hope for a well planned fight.

And, as I said originally, Bush is not healthy for the nation.

We are not so far apart in our thinking, MarkH. We are definitely on the same (and correct) side.

Day O'Conner said she would stay on longer if Bush wanted her to, Methinks he's just thinkin' of a way not to go to jail. According to rumor he's hittin' the bottle. Hittin' the bottle behavior is, "Let's see, who can I piss off next?"

For an eye opening article on some of the issues underlying the Miers nomination, I suggest reading one able lawyer's perspective
(link here).

It points out, among other things, the pure hokum the neoCons have been puking out about "making law" from the bench.