(Vanity) One simple question about Miers (Vanity)

me | 10/10/2005 | me

[birbear]

I know we're all sick to death of Mier's Vanity posts. But I haven't seen this one addressed yet. Simple question. But one that will require a lot of speculation.

To be fully upfront: I'm not pleased with the Mier's nomination, but Bush is the president I helped elect, and I'll stand by him.

The question:

Why DIDN'T Bush nomiate one of the more popular, well known conservatives to be his Supreme Court nominee?

Re the question carefully.

I don't care about the reasons why he nominated Miers. And in the end, she may turn out to be the perfect justice. I'm more curious as to why Bush turned from the conventional wisdom.

He had to know it would upset the conservatives. I'm sure his advisors around him predicted this type of divisive storm around the party. So it really begs the question. Why NOT one of the other ones?

[Talking_Mouse]

My opinion why he didn't nominate a person who would cause a "fight".

Because the President is a leader and has the best interest of our Country in mind -- when he decided it better to avoid a fight, with all of the mean-spirited questions, etc., which would have taken place with some of the other persons he could have nominated.

I notice it is a trend for fellow conservatives to want to "get down and dirty" and have a real cat-fight with our liberal enemies.

Let's not forget who our REAL enemy is. Our fellow countrymen are not our real enemy. They are our political foes, but what do we gain by beating up on our countrymen.

President Bush is acting presidential, while some of us here in FR are acting no better than our political foes. Thank you

You hit the nail on the head. I, too, would have liked a fight, however I am fully aware that my desire is not good for the country as a whole, right now.

Thank you also for reminding all of us that our fellow citizens are NOT our enemy. They, the liberals, are very misguided in my view, but they are not the people flying planes into buildings.

The current make up of the Senate reminds me of a quote by Sun Tzu:
When the common soldiers are too strong and their officers too weak, the result is INSUBORDINATION. When the officers are too strong and the common soldiers too weak, the result is COLLAPSE. When the higher officers are angry and insubordinate, and on meeting the enemy give battle on their own account from a feeling of resentment, before the commander-in-chief can tell whether or no he is in a position to fight, the result is RUIN.

[Logophile]

That R after the name and cowboy hat on the head are certainly able to win over a lot of gullible people.

Well, the R and the hat do tend to remind one of Ronald Reagan, do they not?

And to be sure, George W. Bush has done some Reaganesque things. (His vigorous foreign policy and his tax cuts come to mind.) So perhaps I should have said that President Bush is a conservative-to-moderate Republican, depending on the issue.

[Namyak]

The problem with that line of thinking is the fact that Bush was in a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" situation.

The fact of the matter is, Specter is the more popular of the two senators from Pennsylvania and at the end of the day he brings home the bacon, which in the end is all a lot of voters care about here in PA. So, President Bush was fighting a vast uphill battle if he tried to push for Toomey, and if Specter had won despite(which was very likely) that it would make what Specter is doing now seem benign by comparison. Specter is a vindictive little soul, and he would be downright hostile to anything President Bush tried to do since that election. He would have likely borked Roberts in a heartbeat. So Bush was stuck.

The problem is hindsight it 20/20. We can second guess President Bush, but at the end of the day his choice to support Specter over Toomey was the best choice he had available; at the very least he could exhibit some pull over Specter, as I believe was demonstrated by the Roberts hearing, rather than none at all and have a downright hostile element leading the Senate Judiciary Committee. The fact that it isn't all roses is the unfortunate side effect of dealing in the realm of real-life politics.

[de Buillion]

"He's never seemed to be a spineless wimp before."

I consider him to be a spineless wimp on the illegal alien policy of "officially ignore them, and drive them to the nearest bus station". You don't think that is spineless?

[Ursus arctos horribilis]

Many say they know very little about Miers, there may be very much we don't know about the others. Perhaps the WH vetting process revealed deep flaws in some of the "others?".

[upchuck]

Excellent question! And the answer has little to do directly with President Bush. Rather it has everything to do with Senator Frist.

If President Bush had nominated, say, Janice Rogers Brown, there's an excellent chance the RATS would have filibustered her nomination.

The Constitutional Option could get around the filibuster. But Frist doesn't have the cojones or management skills to get enough pubbie Senators to pass the Option.

Knowing this, President Bush was left with little choice other than to nominate somebody "safe."

[de Buillion]

"If Specter is one of the main problems, then Bush created it by not campaigning for Toomey, and should be held to account for it."

AMEN to that! Did not GWB actually campain for Specter?

[jpsb]

He nominated Miers because Miers is a pal and thinks W is the most brilliant politician ever. She is obviously highly qualified to decide constitutional issues that will effect generations of Americans. Most likely other conservative lawyers/judges did not measure up to the very high standards (most brilliant ever) set by Miers.

[skinkinthegrass]

..Short and (not so) Sweet...The GOP "Army" in the Senate, has far too many "pansies" (McPain, Hagel, Chaffee, Voinovich..."the usual suspects") in its ranks..Its' weak, has no courage...Far weaker than the Senate Liberals.

[skinkinthegrass]

IMHO, the best take so far is Thomas Sowell's.

Thanks, Hadn't seen that one...Senate GOP = Weak, Scared Sisters. :D

[skinkinthegrass]

..But Frist doesn't have the cojones or management skills to get enough pubbie Senators to pass the Option.
Knowing this, President Bush was left with little choice other than to nominate somebody "safe."

...most reasonable explanation. :/

[upchuck]

Thanks.

[birbear]

Many say they know very little about Miers, there may be very much we don't know about the others. Perhaps the WH vetting process revealed deep flaws in some of the "others?".

Interesting thought. I also find the idea that perhaps the others declined to go through the hearings an interesting thought too.


I really hope it's something like that, moreso than President Bush avoiding a fight. I think he at least owed it to those that got him elected a more conventional choice that may have been filibustered. The end result may have been the same (ie. a Miers-type confirmed), but I really think we should have had the fight all the same.

But then, I'm a mouth breathing knuckle dragger who likes bloody fights.

[evad]

mouth breathing knuckle dragger

LOL..I like that one.

[mistress_of_tantra]

This may not be what you want to hear....but I think it is because he wants to move women in power positions for 2008. Such as Rice and so on. For possible female to primp and preen for president position to fight against Hilary. Just a thought and not trying to belittle anyone in any way for the work they may prove to do well in the future.

[DTogo]

Yes, Bush did campaign for/endorse Specter's re-election to the Senate. So if RINOs in the Senate are a problem, part of that problem is Bush's own making.

And the Base shouldn't have to suffer for his own political miscalculations.