Bush's "Playful Glance" at Gonzales Annoys Some Conservatives
From Newsday (via Cybercast News Service):
WASHINGTON -- Maybe President Bush was just joking around to fuel speculation, but conservatives aren't laughing about the president's playful glance at Attorney General Alberto Gonzales when he described the list of possible nominees for the second Supreme Court vacancy as "wide open."My Comments:
"No conservative leader supports Al Gonzales and those who say they do are not telling the truth but are afraid of losing White House access, or promised help with fundraising," said Manuel Miranda, former counsel to Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist.
[Full story]
In the aftermath of Katrina, several people (Mark Shea, for example) have asked those conservatives who are generally supportive of President Bush what it would take for us to turn on him. Well, this is the issue for me. Call it my "polestar" if you will.
The issue of judicial nominations (i.e. nominating strict constructionists who will roll back Roe v. Wade and its progeny of death) is the most important reason that I have continued to vote for Republicans. Yeah, limited government, low taxes, and strong national defense are all important issues for me. But the role the federal courts have played in shaping America's social policy - coming down on the wrong side of the culture war - is the biggie for me.
If Bush gets this wrong, I'm done with him and the Republicans. Mind you, I will never vote for the Death Party. I will, however, go 3rd party or sit out elections from here on.
posted by Pro Ecclesia 7:28 AM
3 comments
3 Comments:
Well, said, Jay. I was tempted to vote for Peroutka of the Constitution Party this last election, but, in the end, I was convinced that Bush would advance the pro-life cause.
I'm still a bit irked at Dubya for naming a stealth candidate like Roberts (although I have high hopes that he'll turn out to be another Rhenquist) with his first selection, and, like you, I'm gone if he names someone like Gonzalez with the second.
A related issue surrounds the '08 Republican presidential nominee. I don't think a pro-choice Republican (like Condie, Colin Powell, Giuliani, Ahnold, etc.)could EVER win the Presidency because of this very issue. You, and I, and millions of other Republicans would never, ever, ever vote for a pro-choice Republican. The party would be completely ripped apart. Do you agree?
I definitely agree, although I question the depth of Condi Rice's "moderately pro-choice" leanings. The other 3 you mention, however, are true believers in the NARAL agenda.
Bush has already increased funding for Title X and planned parenthood, supported Spectre over pro-life Toomey (who lost by less than 1% - Bush delivered for the culture of death senator!), and let Terri Schiavo die.
I voted for Peroutka last election (www.theamericanview.com) because I was tired of being stabbed in the back, but I didn't even vote for Bush in 2000 because of the continuous record of betrayl.
Now he has the Stealth candidate Roberts (as Ann Coulter says, fool me 8 times, shame on me). Go and read or listen to Ann Coulter and/or theamericanview.com and see if we can trust Roberts.
The dog will always return to his vomit, and the conservative christians will always return to the GOP. That you haven't left yet says more than any threat. Even last election, people who were saying vote 3rd party were scared by Kerry.
So the GOP is absolutely sure you will vote for a rabid pro-abort republican (assume Bush's appointments are ALL Souter clones) over Hillary or someone else.
Post a Comment
<< Home