playing the "gender" card ... - Page 3 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 10-12-2005, 05:35 PM   #31
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 10:22 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by BonoVoxSupastar


Of course they will, first of all that's not hard, plus GW more than likely won't be making the nomination.
I do not believe she will make it in.....

He will be making the next nominee....
__________________

__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 10-12-2005, 05:36 PM   #32
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,698
Local Time: 09:22 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Dreadsox


I do not believe she will make it in.....

He will be making the next nominee....
Yeah I forgot about that.
__________________

__________________
BVS is offline  
Old 10-12-2005, 05:49 PM   #33
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,500
Local Time: 10:22 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by nbcrusader



I thought the right was upset that Miers didn't have a clear right-wing paper trail.


ah, you've put your finger on the splitting of the conservatives.

the neocons/Kristols/Krauthammers/Wills/etc. of the Republican parties, those that fancy themselves the intellectuals (and with good reason) are screaming about her lack of qualifications *and* cronyism.

it's the religious conservatives, the Dobson/Santorum/Robertson/etc. who are seeking proof beyond Dubya's "i know her heart" wink-wink hint-hint "she's an evangelical so it's okay" that she'll do what they want.

Bush has destroyed not only Iraq, but the entire conseravtive movement.

and let's not get started with the Libertarians and the Fiscal Conservatives -- they checked out of the Bush camp much earlier this year.
__________________
Irvine511 is online now  
Old 10-12-2005, 05:50 PM   #34
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,500
Local Time: 10:22 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by nbcrusader


So, if you don't understand was GWB means, it means "nothing" and is "idiotic"??


no, it's that NO ONE can understand what GWB meant because it is a meaningless statement.
__________________
Irvine511 is online now  
Old 10-12-2005, 05:51 PM   #35
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,500
Local Time: 10:22 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Dreadsox
[B]I think the sexism charges on the part of the administration is equal bullshit......

Why would you think I would not think it bullshit? You have known me long enough I would think, to know that I am not that partisan that I would not speak out when I smell it.


i'm just looking for consistency.

and you gave it to me.

thanks.
__________________
Irvine511 is online now  
Old 10-12-2005, 05:59 PM   #36
Blue Crack Addict
 
nbcrusader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 22,071
Local Time: 07:22 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511
no, it's that NO ONE can understand what GWB meant because it is a meaningless statement.

Now you speak for everyone's understanding??

What was Melon's quote yesterday? resolute stubbornness?
__________________
nbcrusader is offline  
Old 10-12-2005, 06:07 PM   #37
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,500
Local Time: 10:22 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by nbcrusader



Now you speak for everyone's understanding??


it is a meaningless, anti-intellectual, emotionalist, pandering, simplistic statement.

maybe if he took the time to say what he means, instead of the implicit "trust me," then we might be able to say something.

someone who thinks they know what he means by this statement is fooling themselves and simply grafting their own sentimental notions of "knowing" a "heart" -- again, WTF!?!?! -- you know, kind of how lyrics like "i'll give you everything you want/ except the thing that you want" work.

only this isn't art, this is politics. meaning matters.

and this is a man who looked into Putin's eyes and saw his soul.

whatever Bush is on, i want some.
__________________
Irvine511 is online now  
Old 10-12-2005, 10:05 PM   #38
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 07:22 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Dreadsox




I do not think she is the real nominee. I think it was done to stir the pot, to prepare for the fight for the real nominee. What has everyone been screaming about? QUALIFICATIONS.

The real nominee will have qualifications. And then what will the argument be? Where will public opinion be if he nominates a highly qualified judge?

He is shaping the debate, and the players are taking the bait.

There is my opinion....and it is not about sexism....

This theory has been floating around

but, can it be true?

it was poorly hatched

they needed all the conservatives on board, not just dobson (rove may have let him in on your theory)

but, the left has not gone after her.

it is the hard-right

if she caves and withdraws
can W say "OK now, the conservatives did not want Meirs, so I nominate this Scalia clone to appease them."

It does not follow.

Who?

took the bait?
__________________
deep is offline  
Old 10-12-2005, 10:35 PM   #39
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 10:22 AM
The left has not gone after her?

Really?
__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 10-12-2005, 11:00 PM   #40
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 07:22 AM
The right - is out in front of the de-railing

Quote:
What Is To Be Done?
. . . about the Harriet Miers nomination.
by William Kristol

10/17/2005, Volume 011, Issue 05


IT'S BEEN A BAD WEEK for the Bush administration--but, in a way, a not-so-bad week for American conservatism. George W. Bush's nomination of White House Counsel Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court was at best an error, at worst a disaster. There is no need now to elaborate on Bush's error. He has put up an unknown and undistinguished figure for an opening that conservatives worked for a generation to see filled with a jurist of high distinction. There is a gaping disproportion between the stakes associated with this vacancy and the stature of the person nominated to fill it.

But the reaction of conservatives to this deeply disheartening move by a president they otherwise support and admire has been impressive. There has been an extraordinarily energetic and vigorous debate among conservatives as to what stance to take towards the Miers nomination, a debate that does the conservative movement proud. The stern critics of the nomination have, in my admittedly biased judgment, pretty much routed the half-hearted defenders. In the vigor of their arguments, and in their willingness to speak uncomfortable truths, conservatives have shown that they remain a morally serious and intellectually credible force in American politics.

One should add that some of the defenses of the president have been spirited as well--and in fairness to the defenders of the Miers nomination, they really were not given all that much to work with by the White House. Consider this game effort from one former Bush staffer:

Harriet used to keep a humidor full of M&M's in her West Wing office. It wasn't a huge secret. She'd stash some boxes of the coveted red, white, and blue M&M's in specially made boxes bearing George W. Bush's reprinted signature. Her door was always open and the M&M's were always available. I dared ask one time why they were there. Her answer: "I like M&M's, and I like sharing."

Do these things matter at all when it comes to her qualifications for being an Associate Justice on the United States Supreme Court? Yes. They speak to her character. And in matters of justice, matters of character count.

So what now? Bush has made this unfortunate nomination. What is to be done? The best alternative would be for Miers to withdraw. Is such an idea out of the question? It should not be. She has not aspired all of her life or even until very recently to serve on the Supreme Court. And her nomination has hurt the president whom she came to Washington to serve. Would a withdrawal be an embarrassment to the president? Sure. But the embarrassment would fade. Linda Chavez at the beginning of the first term, and Bernard Kerik at the beginning of the second, withdrew their nominations for cabinet positions and there was no lasting effect. In this case, Miers could continue to serve the president as White House counsel. The president's aides would explain that he miscalculated out of loyalty and admiration for her personal qualities. And he could quickly nominate a serious, conservative, and well-qualified candidate for the court vacancy.
__________________
deep is offline  
Old 10-12-2005, 11:01 PM   #41
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 07:22 AM
perhaps

the Prez is drinking again?
__________________
deep is offline  
Old 10-13-2005, 10:03 AM   #42
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,500
Local Time: 10:22 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Dreadsox
The left has not gone after her?

Really?


no, it's true.

since the Dems don't seem to stand for anything, they're taking a wait-and-see approach. at least in all the reading i've done about her, all the anger is coming from two sides of the Republicans -- the religious Right feels taken for granted by being asked to simply take Bush at his word (kind of how, i think, many African-Americans feel towards the Dems) and the neocon/intellecutal right is aghast at her lack of intellectual and legal heft -- while she's a fine lawyer, she's hardly a powerhouse (at least on her resume) like Roberts, or others who the intellectuals love like Luttig or McConnell.

i haven't heard much of anything from Reed, Schumer, Biden, etc.

wisely, they're sitting back and seeing where this goes.

i am very curious as to what the hearings are going to be like.








is that you in your avatar?

if so -- i like the shaved head.
__________________
Irvine511 is online now  
Old 10-13-2005, 10:08 AM   #43
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,500
Local Time: 10:22 AM
Quote:
But the reaction of conservatives to this deeply disheartening move by a president they otherwise support and admire has been impressive. There has been an extraordinarily energetic and vigorous debate among conservatives as to what stance to take towards the Miers nomination, a debate that does the conservative movement proud. The stern critics of the nomination have, in my admittedly biased judgment, pretty much routed the half-hearted defenders. In the vigor of their arguments, and in their willingness to speak uncomfortable truths, conservatives have shown that they remain a morally serious and intellectually credible force in American politics.


i actually agree with Kristol here. i have been impressed, even with (shudder) Ann Coulter or her equally psychotic counterpart Michelle Malkin, who have proved that, yes, they can think for themselves and will break ranks with the WH when their core beliefs -- and i was stunned to learn that they had a core belief beyond pushing books to the choir -- are threatened, mocked, or taken for granted.

it also shows, to me, that the organization of the VRWC is a little bit looser than it initially appears. yes, they're all highly coordinated and have been well trained by conservative think tanks since the early 1980s, but they aren't lemmings.

at least they're not always lemmings.

or perhaps they realize that Bush/Rove/Cheney have shot themsleves in the foot wtih the 1-2-3 combination of shocking incompetence in the form of Iraq-Katrina-Miers, and the need to distance themselves from this administration and find a new Republican lest the HRC-Bomb take over the WH in 2008.
__________________
Irvine511 is online now  
Old 10-13-2005, 10:10 AM   #44
ONE
love, blood, life
 
financeguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ireland
Posts: 10,122
Local Time: 04:22 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511
someone who thinks they know what he means by this statement is fooling themselves and simply grafting their own sentimental notions of "knowing" a "heart" -- again, WTF!?!?! -- you know, kind of how lyrics like "i'll give you everything you want/ except the thing that you want" work.
To be fair, I seem to remember Clinton coming out with this kind of guff on occasions also. In general, it's liberal politicians who are known for spouting meaningless nice-sounding babble and conservatives who are supposed to be the straight talkers. Actually that links in to the current conservative dissatisfaction with Bush. He is not clearly spelling out a conservative agenda for the US and they don't like that.
__________________
financeguy is offline  
Old 10-13-2005, 10:12 AM   #45
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,500
Local Time: 10:22 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by financeguy


To be fair, I seem to remember Clinton coming out with this kind of guff on occasions also. In general, it's liberal politicians who are known for spouting meaningless nice-sounding babble and conservatives who are supposed to be the straight talkers. Actually that links in to the current conservative dissatisfaction with Bush. He is not clearly spelling out a conservative agenda for the US and they don't like that.


but regarding a SCOTUS nominee!?!?!!?!?

he's positing that, because he "knows her heart," that she will therefore make a good nominee, as if it's a resume credential.

either way, it's stupid, and i'd say the same thing if Clinton were to say it about a SCOTUS nominee.
__________________

__________________
Irvine511 is online now  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:22 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com