WSJ: Harriet Miers - Finally, a Supreme Court nominee who understands real people.

Wall Street Journal ^ | October 5, 2005 | JOHN CORNYN

[XJarhead]

I wasn't implying that you supported that criticism. You mentioned it in your post, so I was just chiming in.

I was accepted at 2 law schools and got in both. One was a top 5, one ranked variously from 7-9. But the decision was really easy for me because I got in-state tuition at the latter -- $4100 rather than $16,000 per year. I also had a girlfriend in state, and saw no reason to leave. I've run into lots of law students over the years who made similar decisions, very often based on the availability of tuitions and scholarships. That's why this criticism is so bogus.

I went to the same law school as Laura Ingraham. Would she have been "inferior" to me if I'd decided to go to the higher-ranked school instead?

[Barney Gumble]

"If W likes her, I like her."

Does the Republican kool-aid taste good?

[Barney Gumble]

No, he's usually not liberal, but he is being a loyal Republican. He advocates that Miers is liked by both sides....which I consider a detrement not an advantage.

[Battle Hymn of the Republic]

I can't tell what is sarcasm and what is not these days...

[Carolinamom]

The Kelo unconstitutional "reasoning" in all its socialistic glory reminds me of what Hillary said....that they were going to take away what we have and give it to those who needed it more. (paraphrased)

[DJ MacWoW]

I think judges that tack left once appointed are falling victim to their own percived intellect.

Brit Hume pointed out that the justices that WERE conservative became active in DCs social life and were apparently influenced by it and that Miers is not part of the Washinton party circuit. She doesn't hobnob with the liberals. It had never occured to me that going to DC and socialsing with the liberals would influence a judges view.

[prairiebreeze]

Thank you.

[ridge]

So Laura Bush picks Meirs. And the only person to defend her on the WSJ is Texas state senator. The Supreme Court is like a consumer packaged goods company. We need more Justices who are attuned to real people's needs. Great we should poll the country every court session. That way the constitution can reflect the needs of today's people. And Meirs can follow her heart.

[longtermmemmory]

How about a NON-lawyer?

How many movies have been done with "ordinary guy" as a better than elites leader?

Why is Bruce Willis in Die Hard the everyman Captain America?

Because we believe that elites do not know much about the real world. (see Stranger in a Strange Land by Heinlin. "Once upon a time there was a Martian named Michael Valentine Smith..."

From personal experience before judges, IT MATTERS that the judge has worked in the private sectore. IT MATTERS that the judge never worked outside of a government job.

I am not too excited about the nomination HOWEVER I do see the logic of doing this nomination this way.

[longtermmemmory]

all pass the same bar exam.

[IamConservative]

It had never occurred to me that going to DC and socialsing with the liberals would influence a judges view.

Do you happen to know if Judges can accept pay for speaking and appearances? Shutting that off would eliminate what is nothing more than beltway politics from the list of things a Judge should properly be concerned with. By "beltway politics" I mean the things one would have to do be sought after for speaking engagements.

[DJ MacWoW]

Do you happen to know if Judges can accept pay for speaking and appearances?

I don't know but I can't picture judges speaking for free. I thought Brits point was a good one in that if you only socialize with liberals it would be easy to become "polluted" by their views and that the years that Mier has spent in DC she's never socialized with them,. She's not a party-goer. She may end up proving to be "the peoples judge".

[AFPhys]

John Cornyn is a liberal Bushbot. --->

ROTFLMPO - you really believe that? --- what a maroon! LOL

[AFPhys]

oops... sorry... I didn't recognize your sarcasm... really sorry...

I ask for your forgiveness.

[Stat-boy]

"John Cornyn is a liberal Bushbot."

That is not true. I do not know where to begin, except that one may refer to the following for his ratings by special interest groups:

http://www.vote-smart.org/issue_rating_category.php?can_id=BTX59882


I will highlight a few:

2004 Senator Cornyn supported the interests of the National Abortion Reproductive Rights Action League 0 percent in 2004.

2003-2004 Senator Cornyn supported the interests of the National Right to Life Committee 100 percent in 2003-2004.

2003 Senator Cornyn supported the interests of the National Abortion Reproductive Rights Action League 0 percent in 2003.

1996-2003 Senator Cornyn supported the interests of the Planned Parenthood (Senate) 0 percent in 1996-2003.

1995-2004 On the votes that the National Family Planning & Reproductive Health Assocation considered to be the most important in 1995-2004, Senator Cornyn voted their preferred position 0 percent of the time.

Fall 2004 Senator Cornyn supported the interests of the Conservative Index - The John Birch Society 80 percent in Fall 2004.

2004 Senator Cornyn supported the interests of the Eagle Forum 100 percent in 2004.

2004 Senator Cornyn supported the interests of the Family Research Council 83 percent in 2004.

2004 Senator Cornyn supported the interests of the Christian Coalition 100 percent in 2004.

2004 Senator Cornyn supported the interests of the American Conservative Union 100 percent in 2004.

2004 Senator Cornyn supported the interests of the Republican Liberty Caucus 87 percent in 2004.

2004 Senator Cornyn supported the interests of the Christian Action Network 94 percent during their legislative career up until 2004.

2003-2004 Senator Cornyn supported the interests of the Concerned Women for America 100 percent in 2003-2004.

2003-2004 On the votes that the Campaign for Working Families considered to be the most important in 2003-2004, Senator Cornyn voted their preferred position 100 percent of the time.

2003 Senator Cornyn supported the interests of the Family Research Council 100 percent in 2003.

2003 Senator Cornyn supported the interests of the Christian Coalition 100 percent in 2003.

2003 On the votes that the Eagle Forum considered to be the most important in 2003, Senator Cornyn voted their preferred position 93 percent of the time.

2003 Senator Cornyn supported the interests of the Concerned Women for America 100 percent in 2003.

2003 On the votes that the Campaign for Working Families considered to be the most important in 2003, Senator Cornyn voted their preferred position 100 percent of the time.

2003 Senator Cornyn supported the interests of the American Conservative Union 85 percent in 2003.

2003 On the votes that the Republican Liberty Caucus considered to be the most important in 2003, Senator Cornyn voted their preferred position 83 percent of the time.

2003 Senator Cornyn supported the interests of the Republican Liberty Caucus on economic issues 100 percent in 2003.

2003 Senator Cornyn supported the interests of the Republican Liberty Caucus on personal liberties 65 percent in 2003.

[AFPhys]

I just believe that people will (and rightly so) hold him responsible for how she does on the USSC

I think that is WHY he chose someone who he knows so long and (hopefully) so well. He wasn't willing to engage in a crap shoot!

If he had chosen someone EXACTLY like Miers, a complete clone with the one difference that he had NOT worked with that clone as closely for so many years, I would be greatly opposed - without question! This woman, though - he knows her work, her work habits, her deeds - far better than he probably knows any other judge, including Roberts. Certainly better than he can possibly know Owen, Brown, Luttig... he wanted as much assurance as he can possibly have in his own mind that this selection would be right.

[kevao]

we preserve the right for Republicans to filibuster at some point in the future

If they didn't filibuster Ruth Vader Ginsberg (who, being a long-time ACLU lawyer, had a GLARING conflict of interest), they ain't ever gonna filibuster anyone.

[AFPhys]

I made a similar post the other day to the same effect. I don't recall to whom I was posting, but he essentially stated that we need a Constitutional scholar on the USSC - someone who knows the ins and outs and precedents of law, etc.

To me, that is just asking for DUmmies like Lawrence Tribe and Ginsberg!

I want no part of such people of "the intelligensia"... I want someone who can read the VERY WORDS OF THE CONSTITUTION and rule if a law is in accordance with the Constitution! I would rather that he asked ME, not some fool "Constitutional Scholar"
---->

As you and Walter Williams state, though, " The Constitution is NOT written in hieroglyphics"

[BigSkyFreeper]

I suspect that the Dims did not do their homework on this one

That's my take as well. Even MoveOn.org is trying to gather information about her from members.