He selected her, geeesshh...
In this photo released by the White House, Harriet Miers is shown in an official portrait. President Bush has chosen Miers, White House counsel and a loyal member of the president's inner circle, to replace retiring Justice Sandra Day O'Connor on the Supreme Court, a senior administration official said Monday, Oct. 3, 2005. (AP Photo/White House, Eric Draper)
uh oh, just heard on kabc radio 790 that Harry Reid suggested to Bush to pick Miers.
The author certainly hasn't been here at FR. ;o)
This woman is, at best, a political hack, at worst, a Democrat operative.
This is terrible news.
Stabbed in the back, again.
Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., had urged the president to consider Miers, according to several officials familiar with Bush's consultations with Congress.
-----
Hmmm. Never good when poor Dingy Harry is not unhappy...
Well, a caller on NPR was very disturbed at the nomination. She didn't like the fact that the President said that Miers had a strong sense of right and wrong. Too much morality, she said. These people are nuts.
What does he base this on?
If she's confirmed, then
will all good Republicans
get winning numbers?!
This is third world cronyism. The lady has never even been a judge.
This might have slightly nudged the court to the right. If anything, it might be dead center where it was before.
The 3rd pick will be the tie-break.
If this woman is to the right of O'Connor, then the Pres. has played smart politics.
Now we need Stevens to take a dive for the team.
"...the first woman to serve as president of the Texas State Bar and the Dallas Bar Association"
... and then as a chair of TX Lottery....
HEY - works for me !
So if this prediction turns out to be true, what will be the rationalization this time? After all, we were told over and over again that that the Roberts nomination was "strategery" to get someone more solid next time and make the Democrats look extremist in their reaction to whoever that might be. So when that fails to happen, then what will be the Ofiicial Party Line?
David Frum worked with Harriet Miers. He says:
She's a lovely person: intelligent, honest, capable, loyal, discreet, dedicated ... I could pile on the praise all morning. But there is no reason at all to believe either that she is a legal conservative or - and more importantly - that she has the spine and steel necessary to resist the pressures that constantly bend the American legal system toward the left.
I am not saying that she is not a legal conservative. I am not saying that she is not steely. I am saying only that there is no good reason to believe either of these things. Not even her closest associates on the job have no good reason to believe either of these things. In other words, we are being asked by this president to take this appointment purely on trust, without any independent reason to support it. And that is not a request conservatives can safely grant.
drudge is blaring that she gave money to clinton/gore . . . .
I think most of the anxiety here is generated from the selection of David Souter. Supreme Court picks are too rare and too important to take a chance on. It takes decades to overcome one bad move.
This isn't what I helped campaign for, as a volunteer; and it's not what I supported, with numerous (and substantial) cash donations.