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.
I sure they'll never be able to live that one done now that Ann has brought it light.
"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."
Ann has absolutely no idea what she is talking about with this point. Law school rankings are a total sham, and mean next to nothing.
Maybe Ann is confusing that with the football program today.
She's really out to lunch on this, and she keeps digging her hole deeper.
Pretty soon, she'll be on WND exclusively, a disreputable source of conservative thought and news.
Dear Ann: It's better sometimes to be silent-and to be thought a fool-than to bray, and reveal yourself as a jackass. ( A jenny, in your case, of course !)
I don't get the logic here. The Constitution is not an obscure document. Yet we're supposed to believe that high-end legal training is required to understand it and "interpret" it.
It isn't. And in case Ms. Coulter is unfamiliar with Platonic thought, the philosopher-kings had to be compelled to rule the just city. That city was established "in speech," not in deed. And the Republic, taken as a whole, not only shows the limits of rhetoric, it is the most searing indictment of political idealism ever made.
"I get it. Ann writes something, you disagree with, and instead of shredding her logic, you flop the Midol card."
Ann wrote a shrill screed notable for the absence of any real factual or logical content. There's nothing to agree or disagree with. Generally, fact-free and logic-free shrill screeds from women are a symptom of, ahem, "female problems."
"I hafta admit, I was with her until THAT. The power of your argument has won me over! She's just a crazy chick, right?"
If she isn't a crazy chick, she's doing a fine impersonation of one.
That was lame.
Ann is a good pundit and always interesting. However, her background and experience is not in the same peer group as Harriet Myers. One can assume from her comments that ahe would be disappointed with anyone other than her personal pick. Part of our problem is we have too many lawyers and too many from Harvard.
I don't think the President cares, or should care, if the nominee is "unknown" to you. All that matters is if the nominee can do the job, and being "unknown" to you has no relevance in this regard since by your own admission you know nothing and it is not your decision.
People need to get a grip and listen to themselves. Conservatives throwing temper tantrums and having hissy fits in the complete absence of wrong on the part of the President.
Cheap shot.
While Bush was still boozing it up in the early '80s,
Another cheap shot.
Bush may as well appoint his chauffeur head of NASA as put Miers on the Supreme Court.
Real stupid comparison.
So if your parents were not rich enough to send you to an Ivy League school you can forget the SCOTUS. Ann your New York elitism is showing.
" Coulter's support of McCarthy was dead-on."
The only positive things I have to say about McCarthy are
1. I believe he was sincere
2. Barry Goldwater voted against the censure and said nice things about him so he must have had redeeming characteristics.
McCarthy's actions against the army, apparently in response to what he perceived as an insult were correctly censured in my opinion.
They're just trying to make a living, LOL. Selling books is what it's all about. Fire people up, be controversial, and you'll sell more books.
Same with the radio and tv guys. Bloviate louder and meaner than others and you might get a higher ratings share.
Coulter and Malkin lost me when they opposed Roberts. He was a brilliant choice and proved it before the Senate committee. He had the libs tied in knots.
Well, why not? She has personally attacked Bush and Miers in this piece.
Not advocating it, but hey, what goes around, comes around.
Ann is wrong on this one. It happens.
Her, you and every anti-Bush anti Miers conservative have been practicing the same complaint she asserts in her article about us "Bush-bots". Non discussion tactics of insult and accusations, cry and pointing of fingers. Its quite sickening and quite old. I am still out on MNiers but have found myself in the uncomfortable position of defending her and the President. I would prefer the facts to come out and her true colours to be shown before having to do that, but you guys are so stuck on this stupid notion that it needed to be a fight that I am incredulous over it.
Click.
Sorry, Ann. If I want to read Molly Ivins, I know where to find her.
Are you volunteeering? You beat me to posting by five minutes!
Bush freely admits he was a party boy back in the '80s, before he turned his life around. Sometimes the truth hurts, but that's no reason to suppress it.
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.