Posted on 10/13/2005 10:41:48 PM PDT by goldstategop
Dear Harriet:
I write to you today as one conservative woman to another, asking you to do something that almost no one in Washington, D.C., seems capable of doing: putting your own self-interest aside and withdrawing your name from consideration as a U.S. Supreme Court justice.
Watching from outside the Beltway of Washington, D.C., I see and hear things that are not reported by the mainstream media. As a talk-show host, I hear from our conservative base on a daily basis, and it's not encouraging for your nomination.
By asking President Bush to withdraw your name from nomination to the Supreme Court, you have an opportunity to put the best interests of this administration, the legacy and the legitimacy of the Supreme Court, and the interests of the American people ahead of your own self-interest.
I know this sounds harsh, but please understand this is not meant to be a slur upon your personal integrity, qualifications or desire to join the leading intellectual legal minds of our country.
But, you no doubt have noticed by now that your nomination to the Court has created a firestorm of debate in conservative political circles. And while I'm sure the criticism you have faced has been intensely painful and personal, I hope you know that those who have spoken out against your nomination do not do so out of malice toward you or any of your views. It is driven out of a love and respect for this country and its courts.
I, and others, have reviewed your record of accomplishments and achievements, and it is rather impressive. Many of your colleagues who worked with you for the three decades you served in private practice have praised your skills, work ethic and ability.
I also noted with approval your service as the first female president of the Dallas Bar Association and the Texas Bar Association.
And your service to President Bush and this administration obviously has been noteworthy, given the trust the president has placed in your nomination.
In spite of all of these attributes, you nonetheless are not the right person at this time to be a Supreme Court nominee – at least not now and not without an opportunity to weigh in on the most challenging legal issues of our time at a lower court level. Others have noted that you would be much better suited serving now as a justice on the Appellate Court. In my opinion, you are highly qualified to serve on that court, and you would be doing your president and the conservative cause a great service to serve on that court.
When I look upon the field of potential candidates the president could have picked to fill the seat held by Sandra Day O'Connor, I am struck by the fact that these other individuals have a track record of involvement in constitutional law that is lacking from your resume.
I've reviewed the records of a number of other women who would make excellent nominees to the Supreme Court – as I know you have as well – and their qualifications speak for themselves:
Janice Rogers Brown has an exemplary resume with a diversity of experience. She served as deputy legislative counsel in the U.S. military; deputy attorney general for the state of California; service as Gov. Pete Wilson's legal affairs secretary; service as an associate justice on the California Court of Appeals; tenure as a law professor; service as a justice on the California Supreme Court; and finally service as a judge on the U.S. federal Court of Appeals. Conservatives know she would provide a steady hand in responsibly steering the Court in the path of a constructionist legal approach.
Another possible nominee is Edith Jones. Like you, Ms. Jones served in private practice in Texas. President Reagan named her to the U.S. Court of Appeals in 1985. That's over 20 years of preparation and becoming familiar with many of the same legal questions that today's Supreme Court will have to consider and debate.
And another Texan, Priscilla Owen, was a justice on the Texas Supreme Court and is currently a Judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals.
No one doubts the skills, qualifications or understanding of constitutional law that these women possess. Nor does anyone believe these individuals to be malleable to the experiences they would encounter as a Supreme Court justice.
During the news conference announcing your nomination, you made very moving statements about the pride and celebration you and your mother shared when you learned that President Bush would be nominating you to serve on the U.S. Supreme Court. That moment when you thanked your family, and particularly your mother, was very powerful and resonated with me personally.
Surely, though, it must weigh on your mind the fact that the assessments from some of the great thinkers and leaders of the conservative movement have not been so kind. Thus far, the chorus of conservative leaders who have spoken out against your nomination includes Laura Ingraham, Mark Levin, George Will, Ann Coulter, Pat Buchanan, Charles Krauthammer, Bill Kristol, David Frum, Alan Keyes, Mona Charen, Robert Bork, Peggy Noonan, John Podhoretz, Michelle Malkin and many others.
Republican Sen. Arlen Specter, who ostensibly supports your nomination, nevertheless said of you: "She needs a crash course in constitutional law."
Harriet, these are comments made by individuals from the "friendly" side of the aisle, people who are inclined to support the president and his choices. That so many have spoken out so publicly must make even you pause to question whether you are the right choice for this time.
I want to share with you a personal story that I believe in some ways relates to the current situation you are in.
At the age of 24, I was selected for a temporary assignment as an on-air reporter with the ABC television affiliate here in San Francisco. The station was – and is – a powerhouse affiliate in the fourth largest TV media market in this nation.
I was a candidate to take the permanent on-air position, but lost out to a more experienced woman. I felt robbed. Not only did I feel robbed, but I also felt like ABC was hurting themselves by not hiring me. Despite the experience and abilities of the woman that ABC selected, I felt my drive, determination and hunger compensated for my rather scant record of experience in on-air reporting for major affiliates.
Harriet, it turns out I was wrong. It took years of hindsight for me to realize that the person they selected was exactly the right choice and that I would have been a marginal selection – despite the fact that I so badly wished to have that job.
I think perhaps you are in a similar place. And I say that with the best of intentions as that statement can be made. This is not the time for Harriet Miers to be serving on the Supreme Court of the United States, and there are other potential nominees who are ready to hit the ground running to serve the people of this nation admirably.
Take joy and comfort in knowing that you have served your president and this country well. And I believe you are capable of amassing a record of distinction on the U.S. Supreme Court someday. But, in my own humble estimation – now is not that time.
I feel confident that all of the same conservatives who are speaking out against your nomination today would wholeheartedly support your nomination to the federal Court of Appeals – perhaps taking the place of either Janice Rogers Brown, Edith Jones or Priscilla Owens as they move to the Supreme Court.
Please, Harriet, do the right thing. Put the interests of this president, this nation, the Supreme Court and our shared conservative philosophy ahead of your own personal desire to serve on the Supreme Court today.
Withdraw your name as a nominee to the U.S. Supreme Court.
Respectfully Yours,
Melanie Morgan
(Denny Crane: "Sometimes you can only look for answers from God and failing that... and Fox News".)
Perhaps Melanie should put aside her own self interest first.
Melanie Morgan from Move America Forward!!!
Who's Melanie Morgan?
(Denny Crane: "Sometimes you can only look for answers from God and failing that... and Fox News".)
Too many words, and the outcome is not affected by her expression. Yet, while the outcome is unchanged, the author and Miers will lose the potential for future friendship; and one or the other will lose face and/or credibility.
Another victim of a piss poor nomination. Thanks for nuthin' GWB. I've got your back on the WOT, etc., but you swim on your own with the court business.
"NUTS"
The last i heard David Frum changed his position to support Miers.
She led the protests and the fight to drive our former Governor from office...
She won.
She's a righteous, nut kicking street fighter....best to have her on YOUR side!
Semper Fi
After 10 days of this, the obvious conclusion is that Bush thinks it's a good thing to defame, isolate and gut the conservative commentator community, for the sake of establishing the alternative of a cadre of Bush Family captive columnists, like Hugh Hewitt.
My goodness! We certainly are on self-destruct mode. The lady hasn't even begun hearings and Melanie declares, "The sky is falling!" This is bad.
(Denny Crane: "Sometimes you can only look for answers from God and failing that... and Fox News".)
Hewitt has become such a disappointment. What a squishy country club RINO.
hey gary you also forgot Rush limbaugh.
"The last i heard David Frum changed his position to support Miers."
your information is old, as usual
he started a petition this week for the withdrawl of this nomination
http://frum.nationalreview.com/petition/
OCT. 12, 2005: BE HEARD
Thank you to all the many readers who suggested excellent edits to the petition draft. I've incorporated many of them, with gratitude as ever for the thoughtfulness and public spirit of our NRO community. Here's the link to sign the petition and make your voice heard.
Please note that we have asked those of our readers who are connected to the law to give us some professional information about the kind. This is strictly optional - for your signature to "count" we need only your name, email address, and phone number. And of course, we welcome signatures by everybody, lawyer or not. We hope you will encourage friends and family to sign as well.
Melanie Morgan, while I may agree with many of her views, is not the sharpest tack on the board. I wonder who wrote this column for her?
Ironically, Melanie has a morning show slot (with a true pro, Lee Rodgers) on KSFO 560 a.m. in San Francisco because she is married to the program director. Cronyism, anyone?
Ken Starr, Thomas Sowell, James Dobson: all pretty luke-warm---the others I don't know about.
Against her: The Corner, Tucker Carlson, Bill Kristol, Robert Bork, Mark Levin, George Will, Ann Coulter, Laura Ingraham, Michael Savage, and Charles Krauthhammer."
Is El Rushbo still waffling?
I see--"cronyism" in your own business is bad, but "cronyism" on the public's dime is good, is that it?
(Denny Crane: "Sometimes you can only look for answers from God and failing that... and Fox News".)
I have been banned from posting, three times. As far as I can tell, for the following comment.
"Almost everyone in the rest of the world really dislikes Bush. Does that count?"
Not only have I been bounced, but the threads have been pulled AND all my posts removed. How incredibly orwellian, I have been expunged ..... :-)
This is absolutely appalling. Are no alternative views to be heard?
To the fascist moderator who persists in removing my posts, and banning my access. SHAME ON YOU. Clearly you have no idea what the foundations are of the free republic you claim to support.
Given that I'm pretty certain I will be bounced, and given that your normal users should be given the opportunity to realise how malignant is the mind control on this site, I'm going to post this comment in at least 20 threads.
If I'm bounced again, I'll withdraw, it's clear that I'm wasting my time. However, this is deeply, deeply disappointing and hideously un-American. Free republic indeed .... Shame on you.
Bad information. Nothing could be further than the truth. He even said today that the hearings are going to devulge nothing so the nomination needs to end now.
Also saw that Armstrong Williams came out in favor of Miers. Hadn't he been caught taking money from the WH to write supportive columns? Wonder if there's any money being routed this time, and not just to Williams?
When I think of that and some of the posters around here, well, it reminds me of the joke about why the [insert name of ethnic group of your choice to disparage] hooker was upset---it's because she found out the other girls were getting PAID!!!
A letter that begins "Dear Harriet" is rather insulting to begin with. The lack of respect for this nominee is astonishing.
were the rage.
Melanie Morgan. Obviously a sexist D.C. insider elitist from way back.
(sarcasm)
Oh, is that why his page at NRO still has a petition urging the President to withdraw the Miers nomination?
This is ilke the last scene in Animal Farm. I can't tell the men from the pigs!
I read here two weeks ago that Morgan was out on the street. Did she get rehired?
Almost none of those on your list are take it to the mat for Miers folks. Most are, "I don't know, but I don't want to believe the President would break a promise so I guess I'll trust him for now folks.
Actually, David Frum pulled a John Kerry, Back on May 29th he wrote a piece that said that Harriet Miers is on the short list of potential picks for the SCOTUS and had no objections then and even said that she is picked, you heard it hear first. So we now know that Frum was for Harriet Miers before he was against her
Yeah, and we all know Bush feels that people who lack his discernment deserves everything they get from his hacks.
Frankly, I'm not a fan of the Miers nomination either. On the other hand, I agree with you that the lack of respect in this "open letter" (read "excuse to vent while appearing polite") is ridiculous and consescending.
Part of me thinks that the President deserves the benefit of the doubt because he has been extremely trustworthy with his judicial appointments. Then part of me realizes that Ms. Miers truly has no qualification to be deciding important constitutional issues, while other supremely (pardon the pun) qualified conservative men and women were passed over for mere political expediency.
You are incorrect. I've read it. He only stated she was on the list but did not approve of it at all. He didn't even comment on the approval or disapproval. He only was making a prediction of what could be.
Are you serious?
She is still listed as a morning show co-host on the KSFO website, though she wasn't on the air this morning. I'd be surprised if she were booted; she has developed a significant following.
You mean you got bounced for this:
Comment Removed by Moderator
To: NJRighty
Almost everyone in the rest of the world really dislikes Bush. Does that count?
See results below :
http://www.leaderofthefreeworld.com/
30 posted on 10/13/2005 2:42:10 PM PDT by BMCWorldCitizen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]
Why, that's shameful.
Zot!
(and what do you have against poor old Joe Lieberman, for crying out loud)
Not true at all. Misinformation
That sound you hear is his point going right over your head.
Not nearly enough.
It's a crude thing, and stands as a mismatched bookend to the Corner's snark on the same shelf.
But the nomination IS a disaster.
She's a dimwit, just like all the others, if she doesn't realize that the filibuster is a power grab by the senate to declare for itself who is too extreme to deserve an up or down vote.
She's hurting her own self interests by not recognizing that the filibusters concocted by Kennedy, Schumer, Clinton, et. al. are the core problem.
Maybe she can include some discussion, even a line or two, about the filibusters in her next article. Otherwise, I'll view her with the same disdain as I have for anybody else that ignores the gorilla in the room.
Ann Coulter, Rush Limbaugh, Mark Levin, Michael Savage, Michelle Malkin, Sen. Rick Santorum, Judge Robert Bork, Rep. Tom Tancredo, George Will, John Podhoretz, Phyllis Schlafly, Paul Weyrich, Grover Norquist, Laura Ingraham, Bill Kristol, Bill Bennett, Jonah Goldberg, John Fund, Charles Krauthammer, David Keene, Sen. Sam Brownback, Robert Novak, David Frum, Peggy Noonan, Gary Bauer, David Limbaugh, Alan Keyes, Thomas Sowell, Mona Charen, Richard Lessner and many, many more.
I'm not in favor of cronyism at any level. I just find it ironic that Ms. Morgan (who, I'll admit, rubs me the wrong way) is complaining about Bush appointing a "crony". I actually agree with many of her criticisms, but hearing them from her makes me laugh.
I have a feeling you and I may agree on the Miers topic, by the way.
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.