Posted on 10/03/2005 8:43:43 PM PDT by Ultra Sonic 007
Earlier this morning, I woke up to the news that President George W. Bush had revealed his second Supreme Court nomination. This was coming off the heels of the appointment of Judge John Roberts to Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States.
I, along with other people, were mostly in the dark about this woman. I, for one, had never heard of her. So, like usual, I came to Free Republic. I have come to see this place as an excellent filter for the news today; in other words, it sifts through the crap, and it does it well.
So I was a bit surprised and shocked when I saw initial reactions from people. I saw posts detailing everything from one end of the 'OH MY GOD DID HE JUST DO THAT?!' spectrum. From 'oh man, why didn't he pick Luttig or Janice Brown?' to 'I HATE YOU BUSH!' I'm not kidding. I was utterly astonished that George Bush's second nominee - Harriet Miers - resulted in such complete, incomprehensible vitriol from the Freepers. For a bit, I was wondering if I had accidentally stumbled into the Democratic Underground by mistake. However, I saw the much more organized layout, and remembered I was in Free Republic.
It had me thinking: did President Bush screw up THIS badly?
So I waited.
As it turns out, things didn't turn out to be so bad.
One of the first things I heard was that Miers was pro-choice. I immediately thought: Whoa; this doesn't sound like a nominee of Bush. Granted, Bush isn't a fiscal conservative, and he needs work on some things...but from a moral standpoint, it makes NO sense for a Christian man to appoint a pro-choice nominee.
I decided to wait a little while longer. It turned out that she's a Christian woman who IS pro-life. It's just that she's never been married, which is why feminist activists were so initially cheery of her (as evidenced this morning). After all, she's a working woman, not bound by the chains of a man at home! Or the chains of a child! Or whatever the feminist rhetoric is these days. Can't bother paying attention long enough. But in any case, the whole 'pro-choice' thing was debunked.
It also came out that Miers had also donated money (1,000 dollars) in 1987 to Senator Lloyd Benson, a Democrat. In the following year, 1988, she donated 1,000 dollars to Al 'I invented the Internet' Gore, who was running on the Democratic ticket for President in that year. Now, I can understand this; it would be quite apparent that anyone who donated money to Gore would raise immediate warning flags.
However, as it later dawned, this whole donation was taken out of context (sort of like Bennet's 'abort black babies' comment was SEVERELY taken out of context to the point where it was labelled 'hate speech' by the MSM). Remember; Al Gore was once considered an okay guy. He was once pro-life (or claimed to be, at any rate). Democrats were once okay guys (before the Leftists overtook them). And let's not forget that all of Miers' subsequent donations were to Republicans. So this argument was also debunked.
THEN there was the AP story with the headline 'Miers Backed Gay Rights'. Now, homosexuality is a big deal. A pro-homosexual person would just be unacceptable. HOWEVER, it turned out that our fears were unfounded. From the article:
"Miers answered "Yes" to the survey question, "Do you believe that gay men and lesbians should have the same civil rights as non-gay men and women?"
It's very easy to misinterpret this question. Considering Miers stance on the Texas anti-sodomy laws (read: she supported them, and she still does), it's clear she isn't a pro-homosexual advocate (remember Roberts? The exact same thing happened, except it was a court case instead of an interview). She merely believes that homosexuals are entitled to the same civil rights guaranteed to them by the Constitution. Nothing wrong with that. However, it's very easy for this be read as 'OMG SHE GONNA GO FOR GAY MARRIAGE OMGOMGZ SHE BAD BUSH SUCKS!'
You get the picture.
Here's some quotes from near the beginning of the day, when people were basically chanting 'DOOM DOOM DOOM'.
I am so pissed off and disappointed. My support of the GOP has just waned a lot. What's the use in voting for them? GRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
BUSH, AGAIN, HAS CHOSEN A FRIEND OH HIS RICH FAMILY. SHE WILL BE VERY SIMILAR TO GONZALES.
Cronyism on freaking parade, people. Bush had a chance to go down in history with J. Michael Luttig or Karen Williams and he picked a female version of Abe Fortas.
One of the legal analysts on CNN stated Harriet Meirs is pro-choice. I AM SO DISSAPOINTED AND PISSED OFF!!!!!! (Catch the CNN bit? That's a big tipoff as to the validity of the statement.)
That's it, I'm done with Bush.
And from a Caption THIS! thread showcasing a pic of Bush and Miers:
That's the top of the hole that we've dug ourselves into.
All those Christian conservatives that voted for me can just jump off that cliff as far as I'm concerned.
That tree on the far left looks like Al Gore. Hey, didn't you send him money once?
See? And this from FR. Not DU.
But as the day went on, reports came out showing that things were NOT as bad as people hoped. Numerous interviews came out showcasing people who knows Miers personally. She is an avid Christian woman who has been involved in the judicial practice for the better part of 30 years.
The American Center of Law and Justic (ACLJ) - sort of like an anti-ACLU - has given her the thumbs-up, describing her as 'an excellent choice who represents the conservative mainstream of judicial philosophy of interpreting the Constitution, not re-writing it.' According to Texas Supreme Court Justic Nathan Hecht (a conservative pro-lifer, FYI), her biblical views, social views, and legal views are all in line with the original intent of the original writers.
Of course, you all have a right to be concerned when people like Chuck Schumer and Harry Reid give her their approval. But here's the thing; think about this. What if they merely said this in order to split apart Bush's conservative base? If that was their intent, it worked like a charm. And let's not forget that Roberts charmed a few Democrats before working his magic in the hearings.
Think what you will about President Bush. Sure, some of his policies are questionable (rebuilding New Orleans under sea level?). Some of his policies are outright treasonous (CLOSE THE BORDERS!). But Bush is a good, Christian man at heart who has gone through a lot during his Administration...and with three years left, to boot.
Let's not forget the Democratic mindset; they WILL NOT ACCEPT ANYONE WHO IS OUTRIGHT CONSERVATIVE A LA LUTTIG OR BROWN. They would've raised such a horrendous FUSS. However...Roberts and Miers completely bewildered people on both sides of the aisle. The two nominees don't have a very outspoken profile in terms of their philosophy and dealings. As such, both sides are confused.
However as time goes, it's becoming more and more like the Roberts' case. In my humble opinion, Bush has shown himself to be a downright genius with these nominees. Instead of picking outright conservatives that would inflame the Left, he picked 'conservatives-in-disguise'.
After all, Ginsburg (former ACLU watchdog and overall purveyor of Leftist filth) is getting on in years. After this, she may decide to throw in the towel, thinking that Bush isn't nominating the hard-ball Conservatives like she (and most everyone else) thought (had it been otherwise, she would've hung on, refusing to let her seat be taken by an 'evil conservative caveman'). She retires. BAM: bring out Janice Rogers Brown.
We still have to wait and see. No one knows how Roberts or Miers will serve on the Supreme Court of the United States. However, committing suicide and destroying ourselves from within (a la the Democratic Party) does no good whatsoever.
I shall leave off with one last quote from earlier that fits perfectly:
She has attended and served at a conservative evangelical church for more that 10 years. She tithes from her income. She is supported by a pro-life Christian justice who says that she holds the standard evangelical view on abortion. She fought to have the pro-abortion plank removed from the American Bar Association. She was the president of the Texas Bar and voted one of the top 50 most influential lawyers.
Wait. Wrong one (although it does help one feel better about Miers, no?). THIS is the one I wanted: Am I on the DU board?
Don't tear yourselves apart fellow Freepers. Doing so only hurts Conservatism in the long one. Patience is rewarded, after all.
This will be sent to chat like the others I bet.
You are in favor of this? Oh, never mind.
Thank you. This forum needs to calm down.
Another good comprehensive take on the Miers nomination at http://beldar.blogs.com/, which is written by an insightful and articulate Houston attorney.
And just for the record, I think Ann Coulter (who called Miers a 'complete mediocrity') needs to simmer down; from what I've read from her recently, she's starting to overheat.
Then again, a lot of people just take her words at face value...not to knock anything against her, but she's gotten real 'RARARARARARARARAR' lately.
I predict Miers will get 55 Republican Senators voting Aye, so what the panic-merchants here have to say doesn't matter. It's pretty entertaining watching the meltdowns, though. Last time I saw something this funny was when Dean screamed.
Please, stop making sense. It's just not as much fun.
I was alarmed at first, but I have come to believe that Mrs Miers is a supreme example of a "Trojan Horse".
To paraphrase another FReeper,
"Bush is playing chess, while the others are still playing checkers....'
ROPE-A-DOPE, BABY!!!!
Thanks for the very sensible post and good analysis of the info known so far. I agree that we shouldn't fall apart until we have good reason to do so, and we may be pleasantly surprised.
Miers managed to head the Bar in Texas; quite an accomplishment for a lady in a then male-dominated field.
Ann uses blonde hair, long legs and crude attacks to become a media starlet. Big deal. She couldn't carry Miers's legal pad.
I thought that was funny as hell too. Twenty-four hours later, he was out of the picture.
It is obvious that the 'tone' and 'rhetoric' here on FR has gotten more DU like in the past few years. Leftists are big time deceivers and I believe there are a substantial amount of members that are leftist plants.
I have been on this board just about from the beginning and to me, it is obvious.
It's fun for me. :-P
And the chess/checkers comment is a good one; I found it RIGHT AFTER I posted. Describes the situation perfectly.
Well, I think the backlash against the backlash is getting tiresome. If Pres. Bush had nominated Michael Luttig instead of Harriet Miers we would have someone with greater credentials, better-established conservatism, more experience, and ten years younger. Try to come up with one way that Harriet Miers is better for our country than Michael Luttig. There aren't any. It all boils down to politics and being unwilling to just go ahead and do what is right. The fact that Pat Buchannan and William Kristol can see this and some FReepers can't bothers me not at all. Pres. Bush's pick, however, does bother me.
Even more amusing was what I read in the local urban publication in Burlington last week -- in the People's Republic of Burlington, many despise him as pro-business and anti-left (based on his record as Governor). They are also upset at Leahy and Jeffords for approving Roberts and want Red Sanders as their next Senator.
I am a bit nervous that the administration is being too clever by half. Remember the campaign finance debacle.
We'll have to wait and see.
But I will say, there seem to be a lot of Republicans that lost their conservative roots. Or maybe never had them to start with.
I would have also preffered it if Bush appointed Luttig (or Brown, or another more well-established conservatism). However, getting into a fuss over Miers when there's need to fuss is pointless, IMO.
After practicing law in private practice in New York City, Coulter worked for the Senate Judiciary Committee, where she handled crime and immigration issues for Senator Spencer Abraham of Michigan. From there, she became a litigator with the Center For Individual Rights in Washington, D.C., a public interest law firm dedicated to the defense of individual rights with particular emphasis on freedom of speech, civil rights, and the free exercise of religion.
A Connecticut native, Coulter graduated with honors from Cornell University School of Arts & Sciences, and received her J.D. from University of Michigan Law School, where she was an editor of The Michigan Law Review.
Obviously a very intelligent person who writes very well. Interesting there are no dates attached to these positions. Perhaps she is much better at telling others how things should be done than actually doing them herself.
Bleh. NO need to fuss, I meant. No need to fuss.
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.