And here's my column on this subject.
John / Billybob
Good stuff John, thanks.
Me, I'm not comfortable, but there's nothing I can do about it so I may as well hope for the best.
Thanks, Congressman Billybob. I appreciate your thoughts more than you can know.
It's not just those two who have raised opposition. I'm hard-pressed to think of a single prominent conservative commentator who's supported this pick. This is most definitely not confined to the "fringe".
Kudos.
BTTT
I hope you are correct. Unfortunately, I have no judicial record to observe and thus no evidence on either side of the argument.
I am, however, uncomfortable with appearance of cronyism. There are many people more qualified than Miers with solid conservative credentials.
The decision to nominate Miers was too cute, and too calculated.
Nice article. Thank you.
With so many good judges out there who are certifiable warriors of the right, who are fighting the good fight every day on the front lines, paying their dues and then some, and leaving a "paper trail" a mile long, why did Bush have to come up with two stealths in a row??
Now we can only keep our fingers crossed and hope that Miers isn't another Souter. It didn't have to be that way and I am extremely disappointed in the President who won my vote first and foremost because of "the judges".
Thanks, John, for this column.
On another tack, I worry about the repeated complaint coming chiefly from the right: "She has no judicial record".
Does this mean, in the minds of the complainers, that only judges can be nominated to the Supreme Court?
That is NOT a constitutional requirement.
If they feel this strongly about "no judicial record", isn't it time to for them to initiate an amendment to the effect that only judges can be nominated to the SC?
Again, thanks for writing this.
If the battle is simply to get W's candidate confirmed, then I would agree, the battle is over.
I asked the question on another thread and received an answer. Do you agree with the answer given by the respondent?
My question is: Who is a better female, outside the judiciary, top of her profession, conservative LAWYER?Respondent: Any woman lawyer, of her age and experience, is more qualified who: (1) attended a top 50 law school, (2) finished at the top of her class at ANY law school, (3) made law review, (4) clerked in a federal appellate court, (5) is a partner in a top 50 law firm, has ever argued a case in the U.S. Supreme Court, OR (6) has published legal writings relating to Constitutional law issues.
This, right here, is the crux of the issue. I beleive that W knows her philosophy. So, the issue comes down to trust W.
Here's the problems:
1. W could either pick a candidate who is in the mold of Scalia and Thomas, who would have made him look like a fool on Campaign Finance Reform, or he could have picked a candidate that would have been loyal to him, and not make him look like a fool on Campaign Finance Reform. Which do you think he picked? I don't know.
2. What precedent does this set for the future? If HRC becomes the President, what argument will we have if Hillary appoints her personal lawyer to the Supreme Court?
3. What damage is done to the long term health of the country by continuing the trend that only lawyers who have never published anything can make it onto the supreme court?
4. What damage is done to the long term health of the country to not have in Mier's place a beacon of conservative jurisprudence to serve as the role model for the next generation of conservative lawyers?
5. Does Bush know the difference between a judge who is a "reliable vote" i.e. will vote to overturn Roe V. Wade because she is pro-life, and a vote like Scalia's who will overturn Roe v. Wade because it is bad constitutional law?
6. Does Bush really know where she will stand in 20 years? After all, her history of being a Democrat when it was cool, and then becoming a Republican when it was cool, and trying to climb the ABA ladder suggest that perhaps she is a joiner and a follower rather than a leader. If "conservatives" are ever cleared out of Washington, how do we know she won't shift left to fit in?
I would really appreciate your comments, as I admire your thoughts, particularly on legal issues.
There are several reports that in comments yesterday, Reid backed far away from Miers..
You have said it all, Congressman Billybob; good job. The hysteria over this nomination is unbelievable. It sounds like "Chicken Little, the sky is falling".
Outstanding as usual.
Another take on the current rabble running through the 'take our ball and go home crowd'.....
Congressman Billybob, I appreciate it. It was pretty refreshing to hear someone disagree with those of us that are opposed to [insert term: mediocrity, cronyism, blank-slatism] without calling us names.
Having read your own opinions and books over the years, and knowing that you have argued cases before that Supreme Court, your thoughts on this subject are of far superior value than those of the talk show pundit critics of this nomination.
On another thread on this subject, I wrote the following:
So-called conservative "talking heads" who are attacking this nominee and this President are not displaying loyalty to the Founders' Constitution and to the principles of liberty, but to their own little interpretation of what it means to be labeled a "conservative."
Thomas Jefferson recognized an important fact about his critics:
"When right, I shall often be thought wrong by those whose positions will not command a view of the whole ground," he said.
President Bush may take comfort in Jefferson's observation as he hears harsh criticism of those who, claiming a label of conservatism, fail to "command a view of the whole ground."
You are correct, also, about the knowledge that an executive gains about the strengths and weaknesses of a person gained from working closely with and relying on the judgement of that person over a number of years--particularly when that work involves precise interpretations of the meaning of the Constitution of the United States Constitution, as it applies to real life situations and government. That knowledge is worth far more for decision-making purposes than the recommendations of a thousand politicians and pundits!