Stingray: Conservative Christian News and Commentary
Posted on 10/14/2005 10:13:39 AM PDT by DallasMike
Matthew Scully, a White House speechwriter from 2001-2004, has a different take on Harriet Miers from some of what we've heard from another speechwriter, David Frum. Scully's opinion piece appears in today's New York Times, and has these tidbits:
When you know Harriet Miers, it's funny to think of her as the subject of such controversy. Yet already her notoriety is such that even the most innocent of virtues can be thrown back at her as inadequate - "not even second-rate," as a National Review Online posting said, "but third-rate." She's a detail person. Diligent and dependable. Honest, kind, modest, devout and all that. A real mediocrity.
Her qualities are disappointing only in comparison, of course, to all those perfectly credentialed lions of the law we keep hearing about. Her critics couldn't run to the TV studio and expertly discourse about her. Therefore, she must be a nobody.
...
And all of us who leave our White House jobs and go on to write and trade on our service to the president could stand to learn more from Harriet Miers about service to a president. Whenever she was in the room, calmly listening and observing, you knew that on any matter, great or small, at least one person involved had in mind only the interests of the president, the office and the nation.
...
It may be, in fact, that a details person is just what the Supreme Court needs right now. If anyone can be counted on to pause in deliberations over abortion cases, for example, and politely draw attention to small details like the authority of Congress and of state legislatures, or the interests of the child waiting to be born, it will be the court's newest member. As a justice, however, she will command the kind of respect that has nothing to do with being conservative, or liberal, or anything else but a person of wisdom and rectitude.
...
Whatever [Bush's] reasons, what America got is a nominee of enormous legal ability and ferocious integrity, and in the bargain a gracious Christian woman only more qualified for her new role because she would never have sought it for herself.
It could be possible that Miers' modesty is a trait that some of her co-workers found unappealing. Modesty is often viewed as a weakness in the world -- the meek will have to inherit the earth in the next life only because they're too weak and timid to get the earth in this life. One of the things that people have often detested about Jesus was his meekness. Judas wanted a conquering king but got a suffering servant instead. Jesus created the earth yet chose to be born in a stable. He refused to save himself on the cross yet stayed there in order that he might save others. Perhaps meekness and loyalty are more important qualities to have in a Supreme Court Justice than a perfect resume.
Hat tip to PoliPundit on this one.
Stingray: Conservative Christian News and Commentary
"Perhaps meekness and loyalty are more important qualities to have in a Supreme Court Justice than a perfect resume."
Thank you DallasMike, from San Antonio's Froufrou! I am really glad to finally see something good and positive about HM!
;o)
ping!
You're quite welcom, FrouFrou!
San Antonio is my second home -- both of my parents were raised there and I have many relatives there. I lived there myself for a couple of years as a young child.
LOL! And Dallas is my second home! Well, Arlington...my baby girl is there...
What do you think is the best scenario for this mess with HM? Had you heard (Bork on Hannity) that other women turned down the offer before her?
Bork also said Bush is "annoyed."
I agree with you. I've been thinking about something like that for a moment.
Would it have been nice to see a more credentialed conservative like Janice Rogers Brown or Michael Luttig? You bet. The simple fact though is that Bush can't trust Senate Republican leaders to back him on a more controversial nominee.
Besides, Bush is counting on Miers not being his last appointment to the Supreme Court.
I think that she'll be confirmed and, by this time next year, finding a conservative who admits not supporting will be harder than finding chicken lips.
Whatever [Bush's] reasons, what America got is a nominee of enormous legal ability and ferocious integrity, and in the bargain a gracious Christian woman only more qualified for her new role because she would never have sought it for herself.
I was counting on that myself! Stevens, or Ginsberg? [please, Ginsberg, please!]
Thank you for sharing the info on the filibuster...but, I thought I had read somewhere (wikipedia?) that the VP can end it...???
I think that she'll be confirmed and, by this time next year, finding a conservative who admits not supporting will be harder than finding chicken lips.
I'll be first in line to say that I was wrong and that Bush failed us horribly. If Miers turns out to be Souter in a skirt then he might as well hang up the presidency because he won't have the support of conservatives on anything.
I'll be first in line to say that I was wrong and that Bush failed us horribly. If Miers turns out to be Souter in a skirt then he might as well hang up the presidency because he won't have the support of conservatives on anything.
Bravo to both of you!
I read somewhere that Stevens wants to retire. Thanks for the ping!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.