Conservatives are Not Amused with the Miers’ Nomination

Christian Worldview Network ^ | October 6, 2005 | Ned Ryun

[Walt Griffith]

When my brother told me the end of last week that there was a strong likelihood of a Harriet Miers’ nomination to the Supreme Court, I started laughing. I didn’t think he was serious. Sadly enough, he was right.

Now I have just a few problems with this nomination. First, I wanted a brawl. I wanted an in-your face, strong conservative nominee with a proven track-record, like a Mike Luttig or a Janice Rogers Brown, that would clear the benches and be a showdown with the left. I’m tired of how the left in America has used the Supreme Court, and the rest of the federal judiciary, to tear apart the moral fabric of this nation. I’m tired that the left has been advancing its cause through the court system because it knows its causes cannot win at the ballot box.

Truth be known, the President needed a big fight between Republicans and Democrats, conservatives versus leftists, over this nomination to replace O’Connor. He needed something to unite his base, especially with his abysmal poll numbers. What he is getting is exactly the opposite as conservative passions begin to boil over at the President over the Miers’ nomination. If you haven’t been following, meetings between the President’s surrogates and the conservative groups over the Miers’ nomination have gotten downright ugly.

Rest of Article

[Walt Griffith]

Alexander Hamilton, in Federalist 76.

"To what purpose then require the co-operation of the Senate? I answer, that the necessity of their concurrence would have a powerful, though, in general, a silent operation. It would be an excellent check upon a spirit of favoritism in the President, and would tend greatly to prevent the appointment of unfit characters from State prejudice, from family connection, from personal attachment, or from a view to popularity.” Federalist 76

[WOSG]

The meat of the article ...

http://www.worldviewweekend.com/secure/cwnetwork/article.php?ArticleID=301

I worked with Miers at the White House. Though my interaction with her was limited, since I was merely a Presidential Writer and she was the Staff Secretary, I had a unique experience with her. In 2001, I was given the task of writing the President’s Christmas message to the nation. After researching Reagan, Bush, and Clinton’s previous Christmas messages, I wrote something that was well within the bounds of what had been previously written (and in case you are wondering, Clinton’s messages were far more evangelical than the elder Bush’s).



The director of correspondence and the deputy of correspondence edited and approved the message and it was sent to the Staff Secretary’s office for the final vetting. Miers emailed me and told me that the message might offend people of other faiths, i.e., that the message was too Christian. She wanted me to change it. I refused to change the message (In my poor benighted reasoning, I actually think that Christmas is an overtly Christian holiday that celebrates the birth of Christ and the beginning of the redemption of man.).



The director and deputy of correspondence supported me. I even emailed Ken Mehlman (then the Political Director at the White House, now the Republican National Committee Chairman), to see what he thought about the message. He was not offended by it in the least. Miers insisted that I change the tone of the message. I again refused, and after several weeks, the assignment was taken out of my hands. I was later encouraged to apologize to Miers. I did not apologize.



That is my one personal anecdote about Harriet Miers. Some will probably write that incident off as an insignificant, almost meaningless, occurrence. And perhaps it is. But Miers purposefully sought to dilute the Christianity of the message, thus revealing to me at least a willingness to compromise unnecessarily without outside pressure. That is my opinion based off that experience and I would be more than happy to be proved wrong.

[flashbunny]

"The director and deputy of correspondence supported me. I even emailed Ken Mehlman (then the Political Director at the White House, now the Republican National Committee Chairman), to see what he thought about the message. He was not offended by it in the least. Miers insisted that I change the tone of the message. I again refused, and after several weeks, the assignment was taken out of my hands. I was later encouraged to apologize to Miers. I did not apologize."

countdown to rationalizations...

[leadhead]

If the President had replaced Rhenquist and O'Conner with two well armed straight shooting super conservatives, the SCOTUS voting would still be 5-4.

The carpers and "common taters" can't grasp :"Never blow your wad when it won't effect any change"

I guess I just miss the point of all this criticism from the Right.

[KingKongCobra]

"I guess I just miss the point of all this criticism from the Right."

Simple really, They've been denied the chance to run around in circles with their hair on fire. The giant "mother of all battles" has eluded them (which we would have lost anyway). We must now continue with incremental changes when they wanted to attempt a once and for all revolution.

[claudiustg]

---Miers insisted that I change the tone of the message. I again refused, and after several weeks, the assignment was taken out of my hands. I was later encouraged to apologize to Miers. I did not apologize." ---

The man could not follow instructions even though they were repeated and he was given ample time to comply. Then he refused to apologize and compounded his insubordination with rudeness. Now he reveals himself as vindictive and petty, nursing this little grudge for years, and he dumps it on us.

Well, no thanks, mister. We've got our own problems.

[flashbunny]

"The man could not follow instructions even though they were repeated and he was given ample time to comply. Then he refused to apologize and compounded his insubordination with rudeness. Now he reveals himself as vindictive and petty, nursing this little grudge for years, and he dumps it on us."

See, that's not the issue.

If this happened during the clinton administration, and the speech writer tried to include the traditional Christian imagery, but was shot down by a white house lawyer, people here would be condemning the white house lawyer, not the writer.

Instead, since only the political parties are reversed, they will now support the same thing they would have condemned 6 years ago under clinton.

[operation clinton cleanup]

First, I wanted a brawl. I wanted an in-your face, strong conservative nominee with a proven track-record, like a Mike Luttig or a Janice Rogers Brown, that would clear the benches and be a showdown with the left.

I predict that with the next nomination next Spring or Summer. Stevens and Ginsberg are due to check out... they would rather die with dignity than hang there hopes on Hillary winning 3 years from now.

[claudiustg]

---See, that's not the issue.===

I'm not taking my political cues from this vindictive little putz. That's my issue.

[RichInOC]

They've been denied the chance to run around in circles with their hair on fire.

I don't know about that. I get the distinct impression that some of 'em can make their hair combust spontaneously.

[el_texicano]

Sounds more like somebody with an axe to grind...

[claudiustg]

---I don't know about that. I get the distinct impression that some of 'em can make their hair combust spontaneously.---

George Will sure did. I expected him to start running around shouting, "I am Cornhulio!"

[RichInOC]

[picturing good ol' staid George wearing a T-shirt...heck, that's crazy enough in itself...wearing the T-shirt up over his head, running around with his hands up screeching "Mmmmmmmm....give me TP for my bunghole..."]

:-D )))

[Cboldt]

George Will sure did. I expected him to start running around shouting, "I am Cornhulio!"

George Will
Peggy Noonan
Mark Steyn

A few others, at least. Why not engage them on the substance of their observations and opinions?

Job applicants aren't presumed qualified - the burden is on the proponent to sell his skills and value.

[Non-Sequitur]

I predict that with the next nomination next Spring or Summer.

Crap. If Bush isn't willing to do that now, what makes you think he'll be willing to do it then? What's going to change? If another seat of the court falls vacant then he'll dredge up another stealth candidate, one he can try an slip in under the radar. Because to him the court isn't worth fighting for.

[claudiustg]

---Job applicants aren't presumed qualified - the burden is on the proponent to sell his skills and value.---

What would you propose? She has to go before the Senate for confirmation. Isn't that enough?

[TontoKowalski]

I keeping an open mind on Miers. I want to see how she performs in the confirmation hearings.

I have made my mind up about one thing, though...

I don't give a damn about her Christmas card policy.

[kevao]

If you haven’t been following, meetings between the President’s surrogates and the conservative groups over the Miers’ nomination have gotten downright ugly.

Well, at least we here on FR have been able to discuss the nomination calmly and rationally.

/s

[TontoKowalski]

LMAO!

[Pharmboy]

Incisive comment, FB.