Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Miers Misstep: What was President Bush thinking?
WSJ Opinion Journal ^ | October 06, 2005 | Peggy Noonan

Posted on 10/06/2005 2:24:09 AM PDT by AntiGuv

That having been said, the Meirs pick was another administration misstep. The president misread the field, the players, their mood and attitude. He called the play, they looked up from the huddle and balked. And debated. And dissed. Momentum was lost. The quarterback looked foolish.

The president would have been politically better served by what Pat Buchanan called a bench-clearing brawl. A fractious and sparring base would have come together arm in arm to fight for something all believe in: the beginning of the end of command-and-control liberalism on the U.S. Supreme Court. Senate Democrats, forced to confront a serious and principled conservative of known stature, would have damaged themselves in the fight. If in the end President Bush lost, he'd lose while advancing a cause that is right and doing serious damage to the other side. Then he could come back to win with the next nominee. And if he won he'd have won, rousing his base and reminding them why they're Republicans.

The headline lately is that conservatives are stiffing the president. They're in uproar over Ms. Meirs, in rebellion over spending, critical over cronyism. But the real story continues to be that the president feels so free to stiff conservatives. The White House is not full of stupid people. They knew conservatives would be disappointed that the president chose his lawyer for the high court. They knew conservatives would eventually awaken over spending. They knew someone would tag them on putting friends in high places. They knew conservatives would not like the big-government impulses revealed in the response to Hurricane Katrina. The headline is not that this White House endlessly bows to the right but that it is not at all afraid of the right. Why? This strikes me as the most interesting question.

(Excerpt) Read more at opinionjournal.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Editorial; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: harrietemiers; harrietmiers; imvotinghillary; miers; noonan; scotus
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 121-140141-160161-180 ... 301-319 next last
To: conservativecorner

That comment was meant to be facetious! I probably should've tagged it, but I figured it was obvious sarcasm, but I guess it's hard to tell these days.....

There were freepers on other threads describing those who question the nomination as "barking moondbats" so I was poking fun at them.


141 posted on 10/06/2005 5:20:43 AM PDT by AntiGuv (™)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 132 | View Replies]

To: oblomov

"Yes, it's too bad that conservatives are the opposition."

- Conservatives aren't the real opposition. The real opposition is coming from the Pat Buchanan wing of the Republican Party who look on politics as some sort of gladiatorial combat to the death instead of being, "the art of the possible".
After all, political decisions should benefit all citizens, not just the ones who voted for the Party in power and to hell with the others who didn't.


142 posted on 10/06/2005 5:21:08 AM PDT by finnigan2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 135 | View Replies]

To: AntiGuv


143 posted on 10/06/2005 5:22:37 AM PDT by Incorrigible (If I lead, follow me; If I pause, push me; If I retreat, kill me.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: counterpunch
Except that she was a liberal Democrat before becoming born again. For that reason I have a hard time believing her conservativism is motivated by a profound originalist view of the Constitution rather than just to expedite a religious agenda.

Sorry but this is not a true statement. I came to TX in 1961 and found myself the only Republican in the state. However, these Democrats were not liberals and many were really Reps in action. Needless to say, over time these Dems changed parties, as did HM and today TX is very Rep.

144 posted on 10/06/2005 5:24:14 AM PDT by Hattie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 138 | View Replies]

To: counterpunch
Do you believe Miers will make us proud in that regard as Chief Justice Roberts will?

That is the entire question, not just the part, isn't it?.

Do I?
Honestly, I don't know.
Bush sems to think so and that's all anyone knows at this point in time. Those closest to her speak the highest of her and her abilities.

So, "Chicken Little" speculation that she is a dim bulb and conservatives have been derailed is quite premature at this point. Her nomination is a leap of faith, when others would not have been so, that I'll concede. Her abilities to become one of the finest are yet to be determined. But cynicism isn't warranted at this time.

145 posted on 10/06/2005 5:24:58 AM PDT by ThirstyMan (Why is it all the dead vote for the Democrat?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 106 | View Replies]

To: Harmless Teddy Bear

On these threads, anyone who disagrees with this nominee is either a moonbat, a whiner, a troll, an elitist snob or something less than a conservative. After this confirmation, regardless of how it goes, the GOP will need the support of those moonbats and elitists that you and others so easily dismiss. You will continue to march in lockstep, but you will find that your numbers have dwindled considerably.


146 posted on 10/06/2005 5:25:07 AM PDT by Don'tMessWithTexas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: safisoft
This evangelical thinks that cronyism always promotes mediocrity. Mediocrity is not what we should stand for.

I believe most Evangelicals believe as you do, wanting the very best people instead of selfishly wanting a lackey who is only there to advance their cause. I think Bush insulted his evangelical supporters with this nomination by assuming evangelism was the first and only qualification they cared about.

If she is the best for the job, nominate her to a circuit job so that it can be seen by all - and be known as ABOVE BOARD.

I agree. I think Bush would have served everyone well if he had waited until near the end of his term to nominate her for a lower federal court. She is ready for that, just not the Supremes.
147 posted on 10/06/2005 5:26:10 AM PDT by counterpunch
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 136 | View Replies]

To: AntiGuv

bttt


148 posted on 10/06/2005 5:26:14 AM PDT by meema
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Harmless Teddy Bear
But like I said that does not seem to be the main issue here. The issue seems to be that people are not going to get the fight they wanted.

When it comes to seating a SCOTUS Justice, I'd rather have a discussion, debate and fight over constitutional principle than over whatever issues "stealth" and charges of cronyism bring to the table. So count me among those not getting the fight I wanted - I wanted a different fight, if a fight there must be.

But there shouldn't even be a fight, if judicial restraint and/or Presidential prerogative were respected by the DEMs and RINOs. Heck, even the GOP-lead Senate acts lilly-livered, tolerating the abuse of cloture to stiff the President.

149 posted on 10/06/2005 5:30:04 AM PDT by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: Don'tMessWithTexas
After this confirmation, regardless of how it goes, the GOP will need the support of those moonbats and elitists that you and others so easily dismiss.

Does seem to be the wrong way to fight a battle, doesn't it?

Destroy your army, so you can't fight the war.

Maybe nobody cares that 2006 is an election year and Bush ain't runnin' for nuthin'.

150 posted on 10/06/2005 5:31:18 AM PDT by Racehorse (Where your treasure is, there will your heart be also.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 146 | View Replies]

To: rockprof

The problem's not the criticism it's the claims that conservatives should abandon the Republican party. That's just completely stupid. The Republican party is the vehicle for conservatism in America and conservatives should work at the primary level in it. Any other party that could be created would not be competitive and would throw elections to the Democrats. If it ever became a national party it would simply be the same old thing again because most Americans simply are not interested enough to demand strict conservative policies thus another party could not stay pure and remain important. The American people are too easily bought and demagogued. It's always a struggle to win their minds because the Democrats can so easily win their hearts and appeal to their fears in my opinion.


151 posted on 10/06/2005 5:31:55 AM PDT by bkepley
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 100 | View Replies]

To: BigSkyFreeper

It probably sucks to see that this nominee is getting no support. So you brand anyone who dissents an elitist, a moonbat, or whatever. The fact is that free thinking conservatives wanted to get behind the POTUS on this selection and he let them down. This is a republic not an oligarchy. These guys are supposed to represent us. When they don't we let them know and they are supposed to respond. That's the process.


152 posted on 10/06/2005 5:34:59 AM PDT by Don'tMessWithTexas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: counterpunch
Except that she was a liberal Democrat before becoming born again

Nope, wrong. She was a Democrat. Heck, Zell Miller still is and I'd vote for him for SCOTUS. In the 80's in some parts of the south there were 2 parties. Conservative Democrats and Liberal Democrats. Carter drove some out of the party, Reagan captured a bunch of the Conservative Democrats, we Southern Republicans have been making progress on the rest for a while. Not all 1980's Democrats were liberals so be careful with that assumption or you risk alienating a significant portion of the Red State base to say nothing of misrepresenting the case on Miers.

153 posted on 10/06/2005 5:35:32 AM PDT by Les_Miserables
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 138 | View Replies]

To: ThirstyMan
So, "Chicken Little" speculation that she is a dim bulb and conservatives have been derailed is quite premature at this point. Her nomination is a leap of faith, when others would not have been so, that I'll concede. Her abilities to become one of the finest are yet to be determined. But cynicism isn't warranted at this time.

So you are taking the faith-based approach. That is fine.
However, my post was in reply to you only caring about her final vote, not how she gets there. I was illustrating why the means are every bit as important as the ends. In the legal world, I'd say they are actually seen as more important.

You are correct, though. She may or may not turn out to be an embarrassment. We just don't know. But for that reason you should care about this nominee for more than just her final votes on the Supreme Court.
154 posted on 10/06/2005 5:36:52 AM PDT by counterpunch
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 145 | View Replies]

To: safisoft

"it is becoming clear who the conservatives are"

This is about useful as claiming who the real Christians are or who the real Muslims are. Kirk refuted that conservatives are dogmatic or could be easily pinned down. I think what you mean is "it is becoming clear what the right-wing is" or something like that.


155 posted on 10/06/2005 5:37:13 AM PDT by bkepley
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: OldFriend

Many of those opposing this nominee are deeply religious people. We do not march in lock step just because Dobson gives his blessing. He is not the pope of evangelicals.


156 posted on 10/06/2005 5:38:29 AM PDT by Don'tMessWithTexas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

To: AntiGuv
Another 'barking moonbat' joins with Norquist, Weyrich, Coulter, Levin, Malkin, Goldberg, Kristol, Savage, Limbaugh, Ingraham, Novak, Buchanan, the Eagle Forum, Operation Rescue, et al.

"Barking moonbat"? The quote you provided from Ms. Noonan is truthful and straightforward: nobody knows how Ms. Meirs will be on the bench. Instead of pointing out why you think that is wrong, you resort to name-calling. Apparently that that is all you have to offer.

157 posted on 10/06/2005 5:39:21 AM PDT by Logophile
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Logophile

It was sarcasm! I didn't think it needed a tag.. Actually, it's kind of telling that some people are taking it seriously. Shows what FR has come to these days..

If Janice Rogers Brown were the nominee the acclaim would be virtually unanimous around here. Just something to ponder..


158 posted on 10/06/2005 5:42:51 AM PDT by AntiGuv (™)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 157 | View Replies]

To: safisoft
Everyone owes it to themselves to read the entire article. Very powerful, and surprisingly not anti-Miers.

-bump-

159 posted on 10/06/2005 5:43:37 AM PDT by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 129 | View Replies]

To: bkepley
Exactly. The answer is courage and perseverance in the face of adversity. We are winning in the long pull. We have won the majorities and Presidency, but there is still work to do before we can undo 60 years of Liberal damage. We need a well developed RINO strategy and defeat the most rabid Democrats strategy. Funny to me how most of our problems have come from the very states that formed the union in the first place..How did their sense of Liberty sour into Federalistic Liberalism? Don't forget the priorities. Topping the priority list is a Conservative, Originalist Supreme Court so the Liberals have no one to turn to when they fail in the public arena of ideas.
160 posted on 10/06/2005 5:44:41 AM PDT by Les_Miserables
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 151 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 121-140141-160161-180 ... 301-319 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson