The hearings will tell us nothing. She will refuse to answer questions on cases she says may come before the court. She will give long answers to questions that were not asked. The Senators will huff and puff before the cameras. That process has never, ever been about finding out what the candidate believes, nor it is a review of qualifications.
Before I go on...
Since people are on the attack mode around here in a way I have never seen before, I have to do this little dance with post right now and say this: This is my opinion. There, hope you all can sleep tonight now.
To continue, the hearings do serve a purpose in that they gives us a sense of the candidate, how well they hold up to public scrutiny, and how well they communicate. Judge Bork showed he was 10 times smarter than everyone else in the room, but the media was after him, and there was no alternate media in 1987. In Clarence Thomas case, it was a hideous spectacle that in the end made his accusers look like the monsters they were. Judge Roberts was simply brilliant and could out think every blow hard with one hand tied behind his back. But we learned nothing of their philosophy. It was a political exercise.
But we should not delude ourselves that anything will be learned from the hearings. No, the time for vetting was before the announcement. If the nominee had been Janice Rogers Brown, then we would have know what we were getting. We would have know her view from cases such as the American Academy of Pediatrics vs. Lungren concerning parental consent for abortions in the case of minors. We would have known liability from the case of Loder vs. City of Glendale. Affirmative action, family rights, etc were all laid out. I can already hear the retorts to me even bringing her up as an example: "You are just WHINNING 'cause he didn't pick her, huh!" No, her, or any number of dozens of better candidates. Miers has never been loyal to Conservatism. She has been loyal to Bush. In 3 years, Bush will be granted a much deserved retirement, and Miers will be with us for 25 years.
Now the critics will argue that because of this "paper trail" good judges like Brown, Griffith, Owen, etc shouldn't have been nominated, and she wasn't. So, we give up the fight with 55 Senators before we even enter the ring. We act like the French and wear a white flag around our necks.
Is this the message we send to all Conservative judges and lawyers from now on? "Hey, don't ever have an opinion on anything. NEVER fight for what you believe in, cause it will leave a paper trail, and we won't nominate you for the the high courts."
The doubts about Harriet Miers are already there. They won't be altered by the hearings. Yes, I'll read the news synopsis', but I already feel betrayed, and so do many, many other people.
I can see this debate is going nowhere fast. It has been going on all day and I am sure the posts will continue into the night. From my standpoint, we lost an golden opportunity to change the court, and now we will pay the price. I am not confident Miers will be on the side I support. I just am not.
Thanks for listening Howlin. You should know how much I respect and appreciate you here on FR. Thanks again, and good night.
Sky