October 4, 2005

Liberals Using Red Herrings to Rally Conservatives Against Harriet Miers!

by @ 4:12 pm. Filed under Questionable Items

In a previous post here I questioned if Harriet Miers is the best qualified for nomination to the US Supreme Court. See: Bush Nominates Harriet Miers to Supreme Court. Was She the Best Available?

Since then the response from Conservative circles has been mixed, although it seems a slight majority are not fully comfortable with Harriet Miers’ nomination. Now it appears that some Liberals are trying to fan the flames so Conservatives continue their attacks, but the information given is suspect.

Today the top headline on The Drudge Report for the early part of the day was:


This headline links to this article which includes the following in the second paragraph:

Gay Rights

An indication of her stance on gay rights comes from this questionaire from the Lesbian/Gay Political Coalition of Dallas Miers filled out while running for the Dallas City Council in 1989. In it, she supported full civil rights for gays and lesbians and backed AIDS education programs for the city of Dallas. (Source:

The linked questionnaire tells a much different tale from the Matt Drudge headline and the statement made in the article.

In the questionnaire the first question does ask:

1. Do you believe that gay men and lesbians should have the same civil rights as non-gay men and women?

And her response is “YES“.

Just running with this single question and response is the basis for the news headlines. HOWEVER, looking at all the questions in total offers a much different picture. One that Liberals are sure to dislike, although it should bring some comfort to Conservatives.

The next question:

2. a) Do you, as an individual citizen, support repeal of Section 21.06 of the Texas Penal Code which criminalizes the private sexual behavior of consenting adult lesbians and gay men?

This is the code that the US Supreme Court struck down and Liberals hated. Well given the headlines you might think Ms. Miers answered in the affirmative to this question, BUT HER ANSWER WAS “NO”!!!!

This woman is more conservative than she’s getting credit for!

2nd part of the same question:

2. b) Do you support the inclusion of the repeal of Section 21.06 of the Texas Penal Code as part of the City of Dallas’s legislative agenda?

Her answer again was a “NO“!

In question 3 she does say she feels there should be funding for AIDS education and patient support services and increasing funding assuming there is a need and resources. This is about as Liberal as she gets in the entire questionnaire. Here is question #3 and her responses:

3. a) Do you believe that the City of Dallas has a responsibility to fund AIDS education and patient support services?

Her response “YES“.

3. b) Would you support increasing the level of city funding for the above services (currently $550,00 per year)?

Her response:

Yes, assuming need and resources. I do consider the AIDS illness as a serious total community problem.

I am including all of question 4 in the quote box below with her response in bold type. This is what we want to hear!

4. a) Do you support a city ordinance that prohibits discrimination in housing and public accommodations based on AIDS/HIV status?

I prefer a legislative solution to the issue raised by these questions a and b. I do not have all the facts on the significance of these ordinances; however, I am willing to discuss the need and make an appropriate decision when fully advised.

b) Would you support the passage of a city ordinance prohibiting discrimination in employment based on race, religion, age, sex, national origin, AIDS/HIV status or handicapped condition?
(Currently Dallas has no city ordinance dealing with employment discrimination.)

(see a)

She wants the legislature to resolve these issues!

Next question and again a rightfully good and Conservative response. I am including all of question 5 in the quote box below with her response in bold type.

5. Do you believe that qualified gays or lesbians should be denied employment (including employment by the police and fire departments) by the City of Dallas solely because of sexual orientation?

I believe that employers should be able to pick the best qualified person for any position to be filled considering all relevant factors.

So there! She feels an employer should be able to consider all relevant factors. Depending on the job an employer should be able to decide. She fells via her statement that for some jobs maybe the City will say yes and others no, but an employer should be able to decide without blanket rules for or against!

But the most telling response was to the question of whether she is seeking this group’s endorsement:

I am not seeking the endorsement of LGPC.

So she would like a legislature to decide on matters of discrimination, supports state morality laws, feels gays should have the same civil rights, but employers should be able to decide who they want to hire considering all factors deemed relevant. Plus she’s OK with funding for AIDS education and and patient support services. This should be the real headline. And although she’s not a “firebrand” Conservative she is fairly Conservative. I’d say she does represent the backing her church friends have given her of being a Christian with moral values.

So there are the facts. Minus the spin!

update (10/4/2005 9:35PM ET): The more we learn the more comfort Conservatives should have. Maybe the Conservatives that remain upset are just offering cover fire for Miers to be nominated with little rebuff from Liberals 😀 . (OK at least it’s a nice theory to wish for 😀 !)

Check out this good news! Miers said to be on `extreme end’ of pro-life movement

Also, St. Wendeler from Another Rovian Conspiracy has some excellent points.

It seems Conservatives are deciding just how strongly they should stand up for Ms. Miers. Having seen more facts I am now of the opinion that we should stand strongly in support of her. Although she’s not who ANYBODY was seriously thinking would be the best and most qualified choice (except the President of course), she is the pick and she is suitable for the job and our endorsement.

4 Responses to “Liberals Using Red Herrings to Rally Conservatives Against Harriet Miers!”

  1. Another Rovian Conspiracy - St Wendeler Says:

    Keep Your Powder Dry

    At what point will our side of the blogosphere realize that the goal of a nominee isn’t to have a philosophical fight during the nomination process, but to win the philosophical fight in the Court. Seriously… the struggle to get to this position to…

  2. Independent Conservative » Blog Archive » Mr. President here is how you unite the nation! Says:

    […] With this single announcement, all the media contrived Conservative infighting about the Supreme Court pick will vanish! Poor Americans will worry a little less about high gas prices, because they’ll feel they have a better chance at a low wage job! All the talk about illegals doing jobs nobody else will do is bogus! Many illegals do jobs other Americans would like to do. And Americans were doing the jobs before they came! (Although our abundance of social programs does not encourage some folks to work.) Everyone would support the War on Terrorism if it also included keeping the door closed to illegals at what is currently the most porous access point! […]

  3. Independent Conservative » Blog Archive » That Cat is right on! Says:

    […] Conservative Cat is right. The Conservative infighting over Harriet Miers should stop! And I’ve even pointed out myself that Liberal types and those desperate for a story are using this to their advantage. Simply playing on Conservatives’ emotions for a good inside fight to continue! (Don’t we Conservatives always claim it’s the Liberals that move on emotion and don’t take time to investigate all the facts?) Look who’s jumping off emotion now! […]

  4. Independent Conservative » Blog Archive » Media gives incomplete information about another Harriet Miers questionnaire! Says:

    […] Notice in question #5 which is about voting against people going to boards that are pro-abortion, she responded “YES – To the extent Pro-Life views are relevant.” The additional words she added are not being reported in the MSM. They simply mention that she said “yes” and give the impression that she would deny any pro-abortion person access to any City Board or Committee that deals with any health matters! She would have only done it in cases where the issue of abortion was relevant! We know this is not the first time the MSM and even some cyber news sluts have botched the job of reporting on a questionnaire! […]

Independent Conservative - Copyright 2022 - Copyright Notice

[powered by WordPress.]

86 queries. 0.586 seconds