Posted on 10/14/2005 11:27:43 AM PDT by writer33
Washington—Harriet Miers was brazen and defiant, not asking President Bush to withdraw her nomination to the Supreme Court despite sharp criticism from some of Bush’s conservative allies, practically telling conservatives to go take a flying leap.
Bush’s bold, religious decision to nominate Miers—his White House counsel and a longtime adviser for the Supreme Court—has divided his supporters, many of whom wanted a nominee with a clear record of understanding of the Constitution, as well as abortion and other lame conservative issues.
Miers left no clues to her position on abortion or any basic understanding of Constitutional law when she served on the Dallas City Council and as lottery commissioner during Bush’s Texas governorship. If confirmed, Miers would replace Justice Sandra Day O’Connor, a known moderate and supporter of invented right to privacy laws. O’Connor announced her retirement in July after nearly 25 years on the court, pending confirmation of her moderate replacement.
In a testy exchange with reporters Thursday, McClellan complained that coverage of the nomination has ignored Miers’ record and qualifications to focus on side issues such as her religion or Constitutional law.
“No one who knows her record and her qualifications would make such a suggestion,” said White House press secretary Scott McClellan. “They should just shut their mouths and be thankful Bush is in office. I think that we are doing a disservice for the American people when we focus on other issues and not her record and qualifications and experience, because that’s what matters when you’re on the nation's highest court. Now get out of here and let me go back to work for the American people.”
The White House raised the issue in discussions with conservative Christian leaders such as James Dobson, the founder of Focus on the Family. Dobson told listeners to his radio show Wednesday that Bush’s top political strategist, Karl Rove, told him Miers belongs to a very conservative church—one that uses snakes—which is almost universally pro-life, and that she’ll smite that nasty abortion law down.
Although Miers has never served a single day of her entire adult life as a judge, McClellan noted that her experience as White House counsel, deputy chief of staff and Bush’s crony gives her the advantage of having leg up on the Supreme Court that few other lawyers have.
“Ann Coulter, one of the biggest complainers, wished she had the experience that Miers has,” fired McClellan. “Miers has more gray matter in her pinky finger than Ann’s got in her entire cranium. And that’s one large cranium. She’s nothing but a blowhard stick figure. Bring it on, Ann! Miers is ready!”
The Rev. Barry Lynn, director of Americans United for the Separation of Church and State, said anyone who tried to bring up the topic of religion during the Roberts confirmation was labeled a bigot. “Now Bush and Rove are touting where Miers goes to church and using that as a selling point,” Lynn said. “The hypocrisy is staggering. There better not be any mention of the word God or prayer, or anything having to do with religion during these confirmation hearings. I’ve had it with this administration!”
Religious broadcaster Pat Robertson, who has endorsed Miers, threatened conservative senators who might be thinking of voting against her: “They’re going to turn against a Christian who is a conservative picked by a conservative president and they’re going to vote against her for confirmation? Not on your sweet life, if they want to stay in office,” he said. “If they give a no vote, they might as well pack their bags, because they’re going home.”
“This is ludicrous,” fired Ann Coulter, author of How to Talk to a Liberal If You Must. “Nominating Miers is like nominating the cleaning lady. I thought it was understood that we could expect a REAL conservative, one with a proven track record, not a crony!”
With the nomination of Miers, conservatives have been fractured, bringing to an end, a once, great ideology. Those who support her are single issue, evangelical fanatics. Those who oppose her are conservatives that expected a proven track record, one that involves some kind of understanding of Constitutional law.
As the nomination nears confirmation hearings, conservatives are wreaking havoc on the Bush administration, posing two important questions: Is conservatism strong enough to survive, and is Bush really as conservative as once cracked up to be?
Ping!
If this is satire, it isn't satire enough, and if it isn't, it can't be accurate.
LOL!!
Well done, once again:)
But..."Harriet Miers was brazen and defiant"??? I haven't seen or heard a peep from her since she was introduced to us. Which may, or may not, be a good thing.
That's what makes it such awesome satire! We can't decide whether to be ticked off, or to fall down laughing.
Why should she cave in to people having a temper tantrum?
Stopped reading right there. This writer is a moron, or worse.
""Scott McClellan. “They should just shut their mouths and be thankful Bush is in office.""
Tell me he didn`t say this.
Ping!
Could My2Cents have a valid point? Possibly. :)
Thanks for reading, SE Mom. I appreciate it.
If this is true IT AIN'T GOOD
Well that's how they act.
And, if anyone believed Bush when he said she was the most qualified he could find, is not being true to themselves.
And those that belive the White House charges that those who oppose this nomination are elitist and sexist are demagogues.
The Los Angeles Times:
The written record of President Bush's nominee for the Supreme Court is meager. But her musings in the Texas Bar Journal in 1992 and 1993 offer a window into a different era for Miers.
At the time, she was perched atop a fractious organization of 55,000 lawyers that included law-and-order prosecutors, boardroom advisors and legal clinicians paid in chickens on the border. The crosscurrents were fierce, and Miers fought them by choosing a path that could safely be described as politically moderate and, at times, liberal — by Texas standards anyway.
She called for increased funding for legal services for the poor and suggested that taxes might have to be raised to achieve the notion of "justice for all."
She praised the benefits of diversity, called for measures that would send more minority students to law schools, and said that just because a woman was the head of the state bar did not mean that "all unfair barriers for women have been eradicated."
She was upset that although poverty was rising in Texas, impoverished families received a disproportionately small share of welfare and Medicaid benefits.
And she was an unapologetic defender of her profession, even the oft-maligned "trial lawyer."
"Lawyers are about seeking the truth, preserving a system to achieve fairness and justice and protecting the freedom of individuals against the tyranny of the majority view," she wrote.
Still, her emerging record as a lawyer in Texas could foment concern among conservatives that she would not be a reliable ally — and maybe it should, said Jim Parsons, a state district judge from Palestine, Texas, a friend of Miers' and a self-described "dyed-in-the-wool Democrat" who supports her nomination.
"I've never known her to be either a bra-burning Democrat or the comparable Republican," said Parsons, who was president of the bar in 1990 and 1991. "She's just not an ideologue."
The writer is worse.
Lame conservative issues?? Interesting terminology for murder of innocents.
He didn't say this.
Is this true Chris? Are you a moron? I thought you didn't believe in polygamy.
Which are?
to focus on side issues such as her religion
Uh, it's the White House who brought that up as a qualifications.
or Constitutional law.
God forbid we discuss constiuttional law when discussing a Supreme Court candidate.
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.