Posted on 10/05/2005 4:03:47 PM PDT by perfect stranger
I eagerly await the announcement of President Bush's real nominee to the Supreme Court. If the president meant Harriet Miers seriously, I have to assume Bush wants to go back to Crawford and let Dick Cheney run the country.
Unfortunately for Bush, he could nominate his Scottish terrier Barney, and some conservatives would rush to defend him, claiming to be in possession of secret information convincing them that the pooch is a true conservative and listing Barney's many virtues – loyalty, courage, never jumps on the furniture ...
Harriet Miers went to Southern Methodist University Law School, which is not ranked at all by the serious law school reports and ranked No. 52 by US News and World Report. Her greatest legal accomplishment is being the first woman commissioner of the Texas Lottery.
I know conservatives have been trained to hate people who went to elite universities, and generally that's a good rule of thumb. But not when it comes to the Supreme Court.
First, Bush has no right to say "Trust me." He was elected to represent the American people, not to be dictator for eight years. Among the coalitions that elected Bush are people who have been laboring in the trenches for a quarter-century to change the legal order in America. While Bush was still boozing it up in the early '80s, Ed Meese, Antonin Scalia, Robert Bork and all the founders of the Federalist Society began creating a farm team of massive legal talent on the right.
To casually spurn the people who have been taking slings and arrows all these years and instead reward the former commissioner of the Texas Lottery with a Supreme Court appointment is like pinning a medal of honor on some flunky paper-pusher with a desk job at the Pentagon – or on John Kerry – while ignoring your infantrymen doing the fighting and dying.
Second, even if you take seriously William F. Buckley's line about preferring to be governed by the first 200 names in the Boston telephone book than by the Harvard faculty, the Supreme Court is not supposed to govern us. Being a Supreme Court justice ought to be a mind-numbingly tedious job suitable only for super-nerds trained in legal reasoning like John Roberts. Being on the Supreme Court isn't like winning a "Best Employee of the Month" award. It's a real job.
One website defending Bush's choice of a graduate from an undistinguished law school complains that Miers' critics "are playing the Democrats' game," claiming that the "GOP is not the party which idolizes Ivy League acceptability as the criterion of intellectual and mental fitness." (In the sort of error that results from trying to sound "Ivy League" rather than being clear, that sentence uses the grammatically incorrect "which" instead of "that." Websites defending the academically mediocre would be a lot more convincing without all the grammatical errors.)
Actually, all the intellectual firepower in the law is coming from conservatives right now – and thanks for noticing! Liberals got stuck trying to explain Roe vs. Wade and are still at work 30 years later trying to come up with a good argument.
But the main point is: Au contraire! It is conservatives defending Miers' mediocre resume who are playing the Democrats' game. Contrary to recent practice, the job of being a Supreme Court justice is not to be a philosopher-king. Only someone who buys into the liberals' view of Supreme Court justices as philosopher-kings could hold legal training irrelevant to a job on the Supreme Court.
To be sure, if we were looking for philosopher-kings, an SMU law grad would probably be preferable to a graduate from an elite law school. But if we're looking for lawyers with giant brains to memorize obscure legal cases and to compose clearly reasoned opinions about ERISA pre-emption, the doctrine of equivalents in patent law, limitation of liability in admiralty, and supplemental jurisdiction under Section 1367 – I think we want the nerd from an elite law school. Bush may as well appoint his chauffeur head of NASA as put Miers on the Supreme Court.
Third and finally, some jobs are so dirty, you can only send in someone who has the finely honed hatred of liberals acquired at elite universities to do them. The devil is an abstraction for normal, decent Americans living in the red states. By contrast, at the top universities, you come face to face with the devil every day, and you learn all his little tropes and tricks.
Conservatives from elite schools have already been subjected to liberal blandishments and haven't blinked. These are right-wingers who have fought off the best and the brightest the blue states have to offer. The New York Times isn't going to mau-mau them – as it does intellectual lightweights like Jim Jeffords and Lincoln Chafee – by dangling fawning profiles before them. They aren't waiting for a pat on the head from Nina Totenberg or Linda Greenhouse. To paraphrase Archie Bunker, when you find a conservative from an elite law school, you've really got something.
However nice, helpful, prompt and tidy she is, Harriet Miers isn't qualified to play a Supreme Court justice on "The West Wing," let alone to be a real one. Both Republicans and Democrats should be alarmed that Bush seems to believe his power to appoint judges is absolute. This is what "advice and consent" means.
If I'm not mistaken, David Souters conservative credentials were impeccable. That did us a whole lot of good! A legal history is irrelevant when a judge makes it to the Supreme Court. History has proven that.
Also....this is how Ann gets invited onto the FOX news programs.....by being a contrarian...
SNOB!!
and yet, you saw the need to respond.
And once again, we see the great attitude of "your opinion doesn't matter, citizen! Don't you dare question the president!!!"
Not really, since there is also that eye for an eye thingy.
Either act like a christian or don't say you are one. That's the issue.
The ones I see bearing false witness are folks like Farah and Coulter.
But it's little more than a side attraction... and interesting behavior pattern to note.
What's interesting is how many whines per gallon y'all are getting on so little fuel. But I've heard those left-right hybrid positions do get outstanding mileage.
Her personal attacks on Ms. Miers and the President don't leave me very sympathetic to Ann for the personal attacks she is receiving here.
I will not attack Ann's character. I will say that this is a viscious column and is not helpful to the conservative cause nor to her own reputation.
Cheer up. She will be on O'Reilly in a minute and you can see her in all of her glory.
To what purpose then require the co-operation of the Senate? I answer, that the necessity of their concurrence would have a powerful, though, in general, a silent operation. It would be an excellent check upon a spirit of favoritism in the President, and would tend greatly to prevent the appointment of unfit characters from State prejudice, from family connection, from personal attachment, or from a view to popularity. In addition to this, it would be an efficacious source of stability in the administration.
Federalist #76
lol! I'm borrowing your tagline for use elsewhere.. Thank YOU! :)
"He has extended the conservative message in all areas. He has taken heat, and kept going. He doesn't deserve this from Coulter just because she is p*ssed. She didn't like Roberts very much either. She was wrong."
..............................
Like he has taken the conservative stand on OPEN BORDERs??
or Like stopping GOV wild spending??
Oh I know you mean like enforcing laws like in Sandy Bergers case or fully investigating ABLE DANGER.
no no no You mean getting the federal gov out of education oh i forgot he has his kennedy bill for no child yada yada
except for fighting a war that was thrust on him he has been nothing but a disappointment to any true Conservative
this was his READ MY LIPS I will appoint judges in the mold of Scalia and Thomas oh yah we just gotta
support this liberal in conservative clothes.
No. He called it to reassure his base.
And, except for some dregs here on FR, he did that.
She is likely to get the approval of every Republican Senator.
wow, that was almost clever.
It was noted because it happens here a lot. The people claiming to be the most christian engage in an awful lot of unchristian behavior.
"Not really, since there is also that eye for an eye thingy."
Yeah, justify it however you want. Rationalization is the second strongest drive in humans.
Ann made the ultimate mistake: she dared question the divinity of George Bush. For that, she is to be branded a heretic, all her good works to date notwithstanding. Then, may Heaven have mercy upon her, because the 'bots will have none.
I really like Ann but sometimes her snarkiness is poorly timed and devoid of intellect. She ends up coming off as the far right version of a moonbat.
Did you see where NRO thought Thomas was another Souter? So maybe you are right. Maybe she will be another Thomas, seeing as all these conservatives thinks she is a Souter.
Actually, he was only speeding because of subliminal guilt: His socks felt very heavy and were dragging down his right shoe. In shortform, his right foot got "possessed"... it wasn't his fault. The "supernatural" is his best defense on this one.
go suck an egg, Ann
I doubt Bush thinks we are idiots. I do think he has made an error in this nomination. He made it to appease the left. What ever his reasons ... he ain't sayin. We've called him on it. It's now time to show his cards.
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.