• Menu
  • Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

Before Header

  • About Us
  • Lexicon
  • Contact Us
  • Our Store
  • ↑
  • ↓
  • ←
  • →

Balloon Juice

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

… riddled with inexplicable and elementary errors of law and fact

Come on, media. you have one job. start doing it.

Whoever he was, that guy was nuts.

Hey hey, RFK, how many kids did you kill today?

Every one of the “Roberts Six” lied to get on the court.

Today’s gop: why go just far enough when too far is right there?

Republicans don’t want a speaker to lead them; they want a hostage.

Let’s delete this post and never speak of this again.

Jack be nimble, jack be quick, hurry up and indict this prick.

It is possible to do the right thing without the promise of a cookie.

We are builders in a constant struggle with destroyers. keep building.

I might just take the rest of the day off and do even more nothing than usual.

Not loving this new fraud based economy.

Jesus, Mary, & Joseph how is that election even close?

Let’s bury these fuckers at the polls 2 years from now.

Of course you can have champagne before noon. That’s why orange juice was invented.

A democracy can’t function when people can’t distinguish facts from lies.

“Jesus paying for the sins of everyone is an insult to those who paid for their own sins.”

Republicans cannot even be trusted with their own money.

Shallow, uninformed, and lacking identity

“Perhaps I should have considered other options.” (head-desk)

Giving in to doom is how we fail to fight for ourselves & one another.

“The defense has a certain level of trust in defendant that the government does not.”

Not all heroes wear capes.

Mobile Menu

  • Seattle Meet-up Post
  • 2025 Activism
  • Targeted Political Fundraising
  • Donate with Venmo, Zelle & PayPal
  • Site Feedback
  • War in Ukraine
  • Submit Photos to On the Road
  • Politics
  • On The Road
  • Open Threads
  • Topics
  • COVID-19
  • Authors
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Lexicon
  • Our Store
  • Politics
  • Open Threads
  • 2025 Activism
  • Garden Chats
  • On The Road
  • Targeted Fundraising!
You are here: Home / Politics / Domestic Politics / Sometimes You Just Have to Laugh

Sometimes You Just Have to Laugh

by John Cole|  October 3, 20058:08 pm| 29 Comments

This post is in: Domestic Politics, Humorous, Politics

FacebookTweetEmail

This quote from a piece in the Washington Blade (gay mag) about Harriet Miers and her relationship with the gay community made me laugh out loud:

Mark Johnson, a past president of the Oregon State Bar Association and former co-chair of the National Lesbian & Gay Law Association, said he worked with Miers when the two served in leadership positions with the American Bar Association.

“She is a very nice person and seems quite fair-minded,” Johnson said. “Really, the fact that she is a personal friend of the president’s is the only thing about her that makes me question her judgment. I like her a lot and I’m very happy for her personally.”

Bwahaha.

Read the whole thing- bottom line- they don’t think she is a fire-breathing ideologue.

FacebookTweetEmail
Previous Post: « Taranto Nails It
Next Post: The First Day »

Reader Interactions

29Comments

  1. 1.

    Davebo

    October 3, 2005 at 8:16 pm

    It doesn’t really matter much what the gays or lesbians think.

    Or what democrats and independants think.

    This will just add fuel to the fire.

    if the gay lawyers are for her then I’m agin her!”

  2. 2.

    guyermo

    October 3, 2005 at 8:54 pm

    noone knows what to make of this. should we love her? should we hate her? should we mock her? should we give her a chance?

    George W. Bush finally fulfilled his promise of being a uniter, not a divider….he united American political junkies in thinking “What the fuck?”

  3. 3.

    TallDave

    October 3, 2005 at 9:04 pm

    Davebo,

    Because they’re gay or because they’re lawyers?

    It’s fun to see both sides of the aisle going nuts for a change. I can’t wait to see NARAL go after someone Harry Reid endorsed. Ah, politics.

  4. 4.

    TallDave

    October 3, 2005 at 9:09 pm

    Also, when taken with Rangel’s comments I think this makes it clear the level of vitriol for Bush on the left has now far exceeded that of the right for the Clintons. I can’t imagine a prominent Republican saying something like this about either the former president or the presumptive ’08 nominee.

  5. 5.

    Rusty Shackleford

    October 3, 2005 at 9:18 pm

    I think Souter has a soulmate.

    Souter and Miers…it makes me think of the South Park ‘Sex Ed’ episode where Mr. Mackey and Miss Choksondik get it on.

  6. 6.

    Pug

    October 3, 2005 at 9:34 pm

    Also, when taken with Rangel’s comments I think this makes it clear the level of vitriol for Bush on the left has now far exceeded that of the right for the Clintons.

    When a prominent Democrat starts blasting away at watermelons in his backyard we’ll be close to the same level of vitriol. So far, not even close. An $85 million investigation into the personal life of GW might be a good start, though.

  7. 7.

    danelectro

    October 3, 2005 at 9:44 pm

    yes, this is exactly like the clinton chronicles video. exactly the same.

  8. 8.

    Harley

    October 3, 2005 at 10:00 pm

    Say TallDave? The vitriol aimed at the Prez today seems to be coming in large part from the right. Heck, they’re still cleaning up the exploding heads over at Redstate.

  9. 9.

    Defense Guy

    October 3, 2005 at 10:14 pm

    In the beginning there was confusion. Expect things to align in their places of party before too long.

    I’d bet Reid will reget his choice of words before this is over, and the right will come to be happy with this choice.

    I don’t think the pres is going back on his word.

  10. 10.

    The Disenfranchised Voter

    October 3, 2005 at 10:32 pm

    She is still unqualified…There really isn’t room for debate about it either. She has absolutely no judical experience and also no experience in constitutional law–something that other justices that were not judges, i.e. Rehnquist, did have.

  11. 11.

    CaseyL

    October 3, 2005 at 11:08 pm

    I have a hard time believing her qualifications are really an issue with the Right. The only thing at issue is whether she’ll hand down the “right” decisions. Why do they think, or claim to think, she won’t?

  12. 12.

    JPS

    October 3, 2005 at 11:15 pm

    CaseyL:

    You’re projecting somewhat. There are some on the right who think as you suggest, but a lot of us explicitly reject the results-oriented jurisprudence that most on the left demand.

  13. 13.

    The Disenfranchised Voter

    October 4, 2005 at 1:11 am

    Hmm CaseyL, I might want to point out that I voted for John Kerry in the past election. It was more of a vote against Bush than anything, but I am hardly a member of the “religious right”, or a supporter of Bush.

    I honestly have a real beef with such an unqualified person getting the job. To me, her views matter not because she is so unqualified. Add in the fact that she is Bush’s personal lawyer and longtime friend and there is no way in hell she should be allowed on the highest court in the land.

    It is really that simple.

  14. 14.

    Stormy70

    October 4, 2005 at 6:09 am

    She is pro second amendment, which is a main reason I support her. She has a long record of this in Texas.

  15. 15.

    Shygetz

    October 4, 2005 at 7:24 am

    JPS–Now you’re the one projecting. Both sides want results. The Religious Right wants to strike down Roe v Wade and get religion back into the public arena, and everything else is secondary. They really don’t care what philosophy it takes to achieve this goal. The wealthy Right want governmental deregulation of business, and really don’t care too much what it takes to get there.

  16. 16.

    Shygetz

    October 4, 2005 at 7:25 am

    Stormy–I’m pro-second amendment–hell, a gun in every pot is my motto! Can I be a Supreme? Please?

  17. 17.

    Ekim

    October 4, 2005 at 8:06 am

    John, Do you mean to say that someone who thinks the president is the most brilliant man she’s ever met doesn’t make you question her judgement?

  18. 18.

    Krista

    October 4, 2005 at 9:24 am

    Stormy – don’t you think, though, that out of all of the potential candidates, that they could have found one who was still pro-second amendment, but wasn’t a close personal friend of the president? I don’t think that anybody here is saying that she doesn’t have her good points — I’m sure that she does. But if she’s close friends with the president, then do you honestly think she’d be able to stay objective if called upon to make judgments that may affect the president or his other friends? It just seems too much like a you-scratch-my-back-and-I’ll-scratch-yours kind of situation for my comfort. (Not that anything the SCOTUS does affects me personally, but I’m still a bit concerned for you guys and what this could mean.)

  19. 19.

    Davebo

    October 4, 2005 at 10:10 am

    Stormy

    A long record of pro second ammendment support in Texas?

    Can you provide us some examples? Perhaps some of her votes on the Dallas City Council?

    Because I feel certain you’ll find not examples during here time with the ABA or Texas Barr Association.

  20. 20.

    Don

    October 4, 2005 at 11:09 am

    I don’t understand why that’s funny. They judge her by the quality of the company she keeps. So?

  21. 21.

    Geek, Esq.

    October 4, 2005 at 11:44 am

    She thinks gays belong in jail. I’m not sure why she’s viewed as so moderate on the issue–because she talks to them?

  22. 22.

    Defense Guy

    October 4, 2005 at 1:27 pm

    She thinks gays belong in jail.

    I’m sure you can back this up with something, or maybe it’s just snark. Guilt by association maybe?

  23. 23.

    Geek, Esq.

    October 4, 2005 at 1:53 pm

    I’m sure you can back this up with something, or maybe it’s just snark. Guilt by association maybe?

    Read the answer to question 2a.

    Question: 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?

    Miers: No.

  24. 24.

    Anderson

    October 4, 2005 at 2:05 pm

    they don’t think she is a fire-breathing ideologue.

    Neither is Bush, but he’s happy to act like one if it’s politically convenient. That’s the scary part.

  25. 25.

    Defense Guy

    October 4, 2005 at 2:17 pm

    Geek

    Interesting. Sort of a mixed bag on the questionnaire. Is that the law the USSC told Texas to get rid of?

  26. 26.

    Geek, Esq.

    October 4, 2005 at 2:24 pm

    Yes, that is the law that the Lawrence case torpedoed.

    It’ll be fun watching the Republicans devour their own, but a Democrat had better ask her why she thinks gay people should be thrown in jail.

  27. 27.

    Tractarian

    October 4, 2005 at 4:48 pm

    It’s fun to see both sides of the aisle going nuts for a change. I can’t wait to see NARAL go after someone Harry Reid endorsed. Ah, politics.

    You do know Senator Reid is pro-life, right?

  28. 28.

    The Disenfranchised Voter

    October 4, 2005 at 6:28 pm

    She is pro second amendment, which is a main reason I support her. She has a long record of this in Texas.

    Ahh one-issue voters now using that “supreme” logic for the supreme court.

    Gotta love that…

  29. 29.

    Baron Elmo

    October 5, 2005 at 3:36 am

    Considering that Ms. Miers has never been married, I’m just wondering how long it will be before the first religious rightist starts up the “Wait a minute — could she be a… a… a LESBIAN?” panic. Should be amusing, at least.

Comments are closed.

Primary Sidebar

On The Road - lashonharangue - Along the Zambezi River [2 of 2] 8
Image by lashonharangue (7/8/25)

World Central Kitchen

Donate

Recent Comments

  • SuzieC on Wisconsin Is A Reminder of Why We Should Never Give up (Jul 8, 2025 @ 10:47pm)
  • AlaskaReader on War for Ukraine Day 1,230: Another Early Morning Under Ukraine Wide Air Raid Alerts (Jul 8, 2025 @ 10:36pm)
  • WTFGhost on Sportsball Open Thread: Suprise! FIFA Says It Can Work With Don TACO (Jul 8, 2025 @ 10:34pm)
  • RevRick on Wisconsin Is A Reminder of Why We Should Never Give up (Jul 8, 2025 @ 10:31pm)
  • MrPug on We Should All Be So Lucky (Jul 8, 2025 @ 10:22pm)

Balloon Juice Posts

View by Topic
View by Author
View by Month & Year
View by Past Author

Featuring

Medium Cool
Artists in Our Midst
Authors in Our Midst
No Kings Protests June 14 2025

🎈Keep Balloon Juice Ad Free

Become a Balloon Juice Patreon
Donate with Venmo, Zelle or PayPal

Calling All Jackals

Site Feedback
Nominate a Rotating Tag
Submit Photos to On the Road
Balloon Juice Anniversary (All Links)
Balloon Juice Anniversary (All Posts)
Fix Nyms with Apostrophes

Social Media

Balloon Juice
WaterGirl
TaMara
John Cole
DougJ (aka NYT Pitchbot)
Betty Cracker
Tom Levenson
David Anderson
Major Major Major Major
DougJ NYT Pitchbot
mistermix

Keeping Track

Legal Challenges (Lawfare)
Republicans Fleeing Town Halls (TPM)
21 Letters (to Borrow or Steal)
Search Donations from a Brand

Feeling Defeated?  If We Give Up, It's Game Over

Site Footer

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

  • Facebook
  • RSS
  • Twitter
  • YouTube
  • Comment Policy
  • Our Authors
  • Blogroll
  • Our Artists
  • Privacy Policy

Copyright © 2025 Dev Balloon Juice · All Rights Reserved · Powered by BizBudding Inc

Share this ArticleLike this article? Email it to a friend!

Email sent!