Why should they get away with this?

[dajoki]

This statement by shrub is enough to disqualify her from serving on SCOTUS, but the underlying meaning is reprehensible. Does this mean that she is GOING to limit or totaly eliminate choice? To me it sounds like yes. Why should this Dobson be consulted, by a soon to be indicted(i hope)Rove? I know it's for his shrinking "base", but can you imagine if a democratic senator said we can't vote for her because of her religion? MSM and the spinners would be all over them. So why then does shrub and his cronies get a pass?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
NYT
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/13/politics/politicsspecial1/13bush.html?ex=1286856000&en=2a9f590af3c2fe63&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss

Bush Criticized Over Emphasis on Religion of Nominee

By ELISABETH BUMILLER
Published: October 13, 2005

<<snip>>

"People ask me why I picked Harriet Miers," Mr. Bush told reporters in the Oval Office. "They want to know Harriet Miers's background, they want to know as much as they possibly can before they form opinions. And part of Harriet Miers's life is her religion."

Mr. Bush made his comments only weeks after some conservatives declared that any discussion of the religion of Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. should be off limits in his confirmation process and that questions about his views amounted to an unconstitutional "religious test" of his faith as a Roman Catholic.

The president spoke on the same day that James C. Dobson, the founder of the conservative evangelical group Focus on the Family, said in remarks broadcast on his organization's radio program that Karl Rove, Mr. Bush's chief political adviser, had assured him that Ms. Miers was an evangelical Christian and a member of "a very conservative church, which is almost universally pro-life."

Mr. Dobson said Mr. Rove had given him the assurances in a conversation on Oct. 1, two days before Mr. Bush announced that Ms. Miers was his choice for the court.

[nickinSTL]

1. 'an unconstitutional "religious test"'

sounds like that's EXACTLY what Bush applied to Miers.

A test of faith...making the appointment essentially unconstitutional.

[Jon8503]

2. Well, we have said on here before about Bush's lack of knowledge of

the Constitution. Somebody needs to tell him and advise him of the fact about the separation of Church & State & no litmus test for a supreme court justice. Of course his boy Rover is busy chewing on bones right now and can't deal with it.

Have any dems yelled about this yet.

I have not heard or read anything any of them are saying.

Are they all on vacation or what.

[dajoki]

3. i hate to say it...

but most of the dems are full of shit also.

[Jon8503]

6. Yeah, I know N/T.

[nickinSTL]

4. I just contacted my Dem rep on this, and pointed out the

apparent 'religious test' that Bush applied in selecting Miers.

He is a part of the CBC, so maybe someone will actually mention something about this :shrug:

[dajoki]

5. boy, i hope so. thank you!!

[dajoki]

7. kick