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

Skip to comments.

McCain’s Blunder
National Review Online ^ | 10/06/05 | Mark R. Levin

Posted on 10/06/2005 11:21:55 AM PDT by wcdukenfield

October 06, 2005, 1:49 p.m.

A liberal minority in the Senate will have the upper hand.

I am hearing two primary arguments for Harriet Miers by those who are close to the president:

1. The president knows her, believes she is the best candidate, and we should trust him because his past judicial picks have been excellent; and

2. There are not enough Republican votes in the Senate to win an ideological fight over a nominee like Michael Luttig, Edith Jones, or Janice Rogers Brown.

I and others have already addressed the first point at some length over the last several days. As I wrote Monday morning in Benchmemos:

The president and his advisors missed a truly historic opportunity to communicate with the American people about their government, the role of all three branches of the federal system, and the proper function of the judiciary. More importantly, they have failed to help the nation return to the equipoise of our constitutional system. And the current justices whose arrogance knows no bounds will be emboldened by this selection. They will see it as affirmation of their “extra-constitutionalism.” The president flinched. ...

Unfortunately, no new information has been presented to change my view.

But the second argument about the impotence of the Senate Republicans is worth some discussion, too. The fact is that this Gang of 14 moderates, led by Senator John McCain, did make it much more difficult for the president to win an ideological battle over a Supreme Court nominee. The Democrats did, in fact, send warnings that they were prepared to filibuster the second nominee. And under such circumstances, the president would have needed 60 votes to confirm his candidate, not 51.

Lest we forget, Majority Leader Bill Frist and the overwhelming majority of his Republican colleagues were poised to defeat the unprecedented and frequently used (or threatened) filibuster tactics that had been unleashed against President Bush by the Democrats to weaken his appointment power. The big media editorialized against it. George Will wrote at length (albeit unpersuasively) against it (see here and my response to him here). And Bill Kristol's favorite presidential candidate in 2000, John McCain, the leader of the Gang of 14, was all over the media making clear he would torpedo such an effort. And that's exactly what he did. This in no way excuses the president's blunder in choosing Miers. But the ideological confrontation with the likes of Senator Charles Schumer and the Democrat left that many of us believe is essential, including Will and Kristol, was made much more difficult thanks to the likes of McCain and the unwillingness to change the rule before any Supreme Court vacancy arose. This president has been poorly served by his Republican "allies" in this regard. Bush is the first president who has had to deal with an assault of this kind on his constitutional authority. And unless and until the filibuster rule is changed, a liberal minority in the Senate will have the upper hand.

Today the president would have to persuade seven of the most unreliable Republican senators to trigger the so-called nuclear option in order to clear the way for an up-or-down vote for, say, a Luttig. It is not at all certain or even likely that Lincoln Chafee, Olympia Snowe, and/or Susan Collins — the most liberal of the seven — would have voted for the Senate rule change for the purpose of confirming a solid originalist. And it's likely the Democrat leadership would have succeeded in convincing at least some (if not most) of the seven Democrat moderates to oppose a rule change. I have no doubt that this was part of the White House's political calculation. And it's possible the president didn't want to limp into this fight. That's no excuse. But McCain — who wants to be president and has now endorsed Harriet Miers — and his cadre must not escape scrutiny for their blunder.

— Mark R. Levin is author of the best-selling Men In Black, president of Landmark Legal Foundation, and a radio talk-show host on WABC in New York.

* * *


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Front Page News; Government; Miscellaneous; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: Arizona; US: South Carolina
KEYWORDS: bush; filibuster; gangof14; judicialnominations; marklevin; mcain; mccain; miers; republicans; scotus; senate; supremecourt
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-93 last
To: Dolphy
At some point you have to call another play, the objective is to advance the ball however you can within the rules.

I agree. However, isn't it about time that the RINOs get smoked out for what they are? Either we will have a party that conservatives can support or there will be a party that will not win elections. It is time to make a stand.

81 posted on 10/06/2005 8:35:42 PM PDT by taxesareforever (Government is running amuck)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: counterpunch

The Nation will do exactly as the main stream media tells them to do.

Should the Republicans fillibuster a S.C. nominee, the m.s.m. will incite the Nation to riot.

Should the Democrats fillibuster a S.C. nominee, the m.s.m will remain quite as a mouse in a church house.

In this case it will be the Democrats doing the fillibustering.


82 posted on 10/06/2005 9:01:16 PM PDT by sport
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: AzSteven
I certainly see your points. As far as the North having a "railroad network" I don't agree.

Here is an excerpt of an 1836 tallying of railway deveopment to date:

RAILWAYS COMPLETED OR PROGRESSING IN 1836.

In H. S. Tanner's American Traveler or Guide Through the United States, published in Philadelphia in 1836, the favorite routes of travel of that era are described at length, and the following list of railways then completed, or in course of construction, is given under the heads of the different states, viz.:

ALABAMA.—A railroad is now in progress from Decatur, in Morgan county, to a point 10 miles below Tuscumbia, on the Tennessee. Length, 62 miles.

DELAWARE.—The New Castle and Frenchtown Railroad extends from New Castle to Frenchtown. Length, 16 and 19/100 miles. A railroad to extend from Wilmington to Downingtown, in Pennsylvania, is proposed.

GEORGIA.—Alatamaha and Brunswick Railroad, 12 miles in length.

KENTUCKY.—Lexington and Ohio Railroad, commences at Lexington, passes through Frankfort, and thence to shipping point, near Louisville. Length, 85 miles.

LOUISIANA.—The New Orleans and Pontchartrain Railroad, 5 miles long.

MARYLAND.—Baltimore and Ohio Railroad, extends from Baltimore to Point of Rocks, on the Potomac, 67-five-eighths miles from Baltimore. This road is to be continued to the Ohio river. A road of a single track extends from the main line to Frederick, 3½ miles. Baltimore and Susquehanna Railroad, commenced in 1830, is to extend to York, Pennsylvania. Length, when completed, 76 miles. Another railroad is projected, to extend from Baltimore to the Susquehanna at Port Deposit, and thence to unite with the Oxford Railroad, of Pennsylvania, which intersects the Columbia Railroad about 40 miles from Philadelphia. Baltimore and Washington Railroad. Length, 37¾ miles. This work is now completed.

MASSACHUSETTS.—Worcester Railroad, 43 miles in length. It is proposed to continue this road to the Connecticut, and to construct a branch to Milberry. Boston and Providence Railroad. Length, 43 miles. Boston and Lowell Railroad, length 25 miles, now in progress. Quincy Railroad, used for transporting granite from the quarry in Quincy to Neponset river. Length, 3 miles; branches, 1 mile.

MISSISSIPPI.—St. Francisville and Woodville Railroad, 26 miles in length. Vicksburg and Clinton Railroad, length 37 miles (proposed).

NEW JERSEY.—Camden and Amboy Railroad, commences at Camden, opposite Philadelphia, and terminates at South Amboy. Length, 61 miles. Paterson and Hudson River Railroad, from Jersey City, opposite New York, to Paterson, on the Passaic. Length, 16 30/100 miles. It is proposed to extend this road to the Morris Canal. New Jersey Railroad, commences on the last-mentioned railroad, about 2 miles from Jersey City, and terminates at New Brunswick. Length, 28 miles.

NEW YORK.—Mohawk and Hudson River Railroad, from Albany to Schenectady, 16 miles. Schenectady and Saratoga Railroad, from Schenectady to Saratoga Springs, 20 miles. Catskill and Canajoharie Railroad, from Catskill to Canajoharie (now in progress), 70 miles. Ithaca and Owego Railroad, 29 miles. Harlem Railroad, on Manhattan Island. Rochester Railroad (now in progress), from Rochester to a point below the Falls of Genesee, Schenectady and Utica Railroad (now in progress). Length, 80 miles. Bath Railroad, from Bath to Crooked Lake, 5 miles. Rochester and Batavia Railroad (now in progress), 28 miles. Troy and Ballston Railroad (now in progress), 22 miles. Several other roads are proposed in different parts of the state.

NORTH CAROLINA.—Railroads are projected to extend from Fayetteville to Cape Fear river; from Wilmington, through Fayetteville and Salisbury, to Beattysford, on the Catawba, a distance of 250 miles; and several others.

PENNSYLVANIA.—State Railroads.—Columbia Railroad, extends from Philadelphia to Columbia, on the Susquehanna. Length, 81 60/100 miles. Allegheny Portage Railroad, from Hollidaysburg to Johnstown, forms the connecting link between the Central and Western divisions of the Pennsylvania Canal. Length, 36 69/100 miles. Railroads constructed by joint stock companies:—
Mauch Chunk Railroad, from Mauch Chunk to the coal mines, 9 miles. Room Run Railroad, from Mauch Chunk to the coal mine on Room Run,5 26/100 miles. Mount Carbon Railroad, from Mount Carbon to Norwegian valley, 7 24/100 miles. Schuylkill Valley Railroad, from Port Carbon to Tuscarora, 10 miles; branches of the preceding, 15 miles. Schuylkill Railroad, 13 miles. Mill Creek Railroad, from Port Carbon to the mines near Mill Creek, Length, including branches, 7 miles. Mine Hill and Schuylkill Haven Railroad, from Schuylkill Haven to the coal mines at Mine Hill. Length, including two branches, 20 miles. Pine Grove Railroad, 4 miles in length. Little Schuylkill Railroad, from Port Clinton to Tamaqua, 23 miles. Lackawaxen Railroad, from Honesdale to Carbondale, 16½ miles. West Chester Railroad, front the Columbia Railroad to West Chester, 9 miles. Philadelphia, Germantown and Norristown Railroad, (about 7 miles of this road are completed; a new route to Norristown, leaving Germantown to the north-east has been adopted.) Lykens Valley Railroad, front Broad Mountain to Millersburg. Philadelphia and Trenton Railroad, 26¼ miles in length. Central Railroad, from the vicinity of Pottsville to Sunbury, 44 54/100 miles; Danville branch, 7 miles long; whole length 51 54/100 miles. Oxford Railroad, now in progress, extends from the Columbia Railroad to the Maryland state line. Reading Railroad, to extend from Norristown to Port Clinton.

RHODE ISLAND.—Stonington railroad, now in progress, extends from Stonington, in Connecticut, to Providence, 46 miles in length. A company has been incorporated to construct a railroad from Providence to Norwich, in Connecticut.

SOUTH CAROLINA.—South Carolina Railroad, commences at Charleston, and terminates in the town of Hamburg, opposite Augusta; entire length, 135 75/100 miles. It is proposed to construct a branch to Orangeburg, and thence to Columbia, &c., and another to Barnwell Court House.

TENNESSEE.—A railroad from the town of Randolph, on the Mississippi, to Jackson, in Madison county, 65 miles, and one from Nashville to New Orleans, are proposed, and measures for insuring their early completion have been adopted.

VIRGINIA.—Manchester Railroad, extends from Manchester to the coal mines. Length, 13 miles. Winchester Railroad, extends front Harper's Ferry to Winchester. Length, 30 miles. Petersburg and Roanoke Railroad, extends from Petersburg, in Virginia, to Blakely, at the foot of the Roanoke Canal, in North Carolina. Length, 59 38/100 miles. A branch of this road leaves the main line about 10 miles from Blakely, which extends to the head of the rapids of Roanoke. Length, about 12 miles. Portsmouth and Roanoke Railroad, commences at Portsmouth, opposite Norfolk, passes in it direct course, intersects the Petersburg road 6 miles from Blakely, and terminates in the Roanoke a short distance below the Petersburg branch. Length, 80 miles. Richmond and Petersburg Railroad (now in progress) Length, 21 50/100 miles. Richmond and Fredericksburg Railroad (now in progress). Length, 64 miles. Belleplain Railroad, extends from Fredericksburg to Belleplain, situated on a branch of the Potomac (in progress). Length, 11 miles. Several other railroads are proposed.

The reported number of miles of railway constructed in the United States in the third decade was 2,264.67. Of this mileage, the amount completed in each of the years named was as follows: 1830, 39.80; 1831, 98.70; 1832, 191.30; 1833, 115.91; 1834, 213.92; 1835, 137.82; 1836, 280.08; 1837, 348.38; 1838, 452.88; 1839, 385.88; total, 2,264.67.

Of these railways, the mileage located in New England was 356.68; in Middle states, Delaware, Maryland, and a few Western and Northwestern states, 1,399.89; Southern states, 487.35; South-western states, 20.75.




Don't see much of a "network" in the above information. These railroads are all very short, more like segments.



This image is of a 19th Century model of an American 1840 engine, and supposedly from real life.



This is labled 1854-58, English, and very much later than the time we are discussing. The English machines were larger and heavier than American at this time.


Somewhere I saw an drawing of railroad rails through time. The 1840 rails were tiny, just 2, 2.5 inches high, and so fully stressed by the miniature engines of the day and six cars carrying a dozen passengers each.

What I am getting at is that the 1840 railroad technology was capable, over 1861-65 time and distance, of miniscule tonnage.

In any case the Northern manpower and industrial capability were too small to force a decision in 1840, I think. Ironclad invulnerable warships, Dahlgren guns, Parrott rifles, etc. were in the future. I doubt even a blockade of the South was possible.

More importantly the indoctrination of the Northern population was not far enough advanced in 1840. The extremely violent North of 1863 was just not there in 1840. Politically there wasn't any readiness for an invasion of the South. As Clausewitz put it, "War is an extension of politics..."

An 1840 War of Secession would, I believe, have been something more the Blackhawk War than "Mr. Polk's War", much less like 1861-65. Had a good time working this post up. Bit of an historical bent myself!
83 posted on 10/07/2005 1:20:38 AM PDT by Iris7 ("Let me go to the house of the Father.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: wcdukenfield; Lando Lincoln; quidnunc; .cnI redruM; Valin; King Prout; SJackson; dennisw; ...

Nailed It!

This ping list is not author-specific for articles I'd like to share. Some for the perfect moral clarity, some for provocative thoughts; or simply interesting articles I'd hate to miss myself. (I don't have to agree with the author all 100% to feel the need to share an article.) I will try not to abuse the ping list and not to annoy you too much, but on some days there is more of the good stuff that is worthy of attention. You can see the list of articles I pinged to lately  on  my page.
You are welcome in or out, just freepmail me (and note which PING list you are talking about). Besides this one, I keep 2 separate PING lists for my favorite authors Victor Davis Hanson and Orson Scott Card.  

84 posted on 10/07/2005 5:32:07 AM PDT by Tolik
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hank Rearden
If Bush Jr. doesn't have the guts to take on the likes of Schmucky Schumer, Kennedy and Feinswine now, then when, exactly?

I think you are talking about the wrong branch of government there. It's the senate Republicans who are GUTLESS!

85 posted on 10/07/2005 5:54:49 AM PDT by painter (We celebrate liberty which comes from God not from government.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: wcdukenfield

McCain makes everything more difficult - his latest being to restrict interrogation of terrorists.

CFR, Gang of 14, the coddling of terrorists - there is nothing he has sponsored that isn't a disaster. And yet there are people who think this guy is smart enough to be president.

Thank God he will be 72 by November 2008 and the American people still worship youth.


86 posted on 10/07/2005 5:55:53 AM PDT by Let's Roll ( "Congressmen who ... undermine the military ... should be arrested, exiled or hanged" - A. Lincoln)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mister Baredog
At least Bush threw them another curveball. He is the President, I'm thinking Miers might be a Trogan Horse that the DUmmies will forever hate. I really think that's W's goal, don't you?

I do.

87 posted on 10/07/2005 6:08:51 AM PDT by painter (We celebrate liberty which comes from God not from government.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: TeenagedConservative
The Democrats will grasp any straw to make it seem that they're still in the game. Of course they welcome internecine fighting between Republicans, it makes it seem that the Democrats have a chance.

The more I reflect on it, the more I'm confident that Bush is looking two moves into the future. He's put this one in the bank, and is looking at his final two Supreme Court nominations, which are yet to open up, but which he must win to solidify his record as President.

In that future calculus, Bush is counting on Republican gains in both the House and Senate in 2006. You might think that the House is irrelevant to Senate battles. Not so. It is a two-rail shot.

The stronger hold that Republicans have on the House, the more pressure Bush can put on squish Republicans in the Senate, who after all still have their interests in passing ordinary legislation. Bottom line: I think that Bush & Company are already planning on two knock-down drag-out fights to replace (for instance) Ginsburg and Stevens, with a new, working majority of 60 in the Senate.

Congressman Billybob

Latest column: "Harriet Miers and the 'Pigpen' Press"

88 posted on 10/07/2005 6:35:29 AM PDT by Congressman Billybob (President Bush plays chess while his opponents are playing checkers.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: sine_nomine
It is just plain silly to talk about Ann Coulter as a Supreme Court nominee. There is such a thing as "judicial temperament." And whatever minimum of restraint that involves, Coulter doesn't make the grade. And I am not picking on Coulter here. I don't make the grade either.

And, don't make the mistake of judging anyone's current ability to understand Supreme Court processes, on what he/she did in school or in a clerkship, a quarter century ago. By contrast to Coulter, for instance, I did not go to an Ivy League law school (undergrad, only). I didn't clerk for any judge at any level.

On the other hand, over the decades I've had majorities in the Supreme Court quote my work with approval in making their decisions. Once the Court did unanimously what only I had suggested in a brief (Bush v. Gore, Round I, December, 2000).

Does that mean I'm always right in prognosticating on Supreme Court cases, or nominees? Not on your tintype. However, I'll stack my qualifications to comment up against anyone, including Coulter and Will, and especially the likes of Buchanan and Delgadio. Please click below.

Congressman Billybob

Latest column: "Harriet Miers and the 'Pigpen' Press"

89 posted on 10/07/2005 6:55:56 AM PDT by Congressman Billybob (uo)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: Congressman Billybob

I am impressed that you have been cited. That is great, quite an accomplishment. I mean it.

I mentioned Ann and repeated it knowing she would never get nominated. Going back a little, I am very sorry that the castrati let the Senate bork Bork. That was the beginning of the end. Now it is accepted practice.

I do not think that only the Ivy Leagues can give a great legal education, etc. etc. Yet I remain disgusted with Bush for throwing away a great opportunity, one for which I have been waiting for many years. He had great candidates. Scalia would have made a great chief justice. I am reasonably happy with Roberts, but he is still an unknown. I would like to have seen two certified Constitutional originalists.

I do not vote for the person but for the ideas. Bush has shipwrecked his party by promoting Democrat ideas and supporting RINOs like Specter.


90 posted on 10/07/2005 7:18:39 AM PDT by sine_nomine (CBS' Mary Mapes: "It dawned on me that I was present at the birth of a political jihad.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: Howlin
"Why not?"

From the historical perspective, that's the way its always gone: the majority has always gone back and forth over time.

More specifically though in this case, Bush and the republican party have alienated a lot of conservatives these last few years and that's really coming to head now w/ the pork laden transportation bill, the Katrina spending, the claim by Bush that NO's poverty was the result of racism, etc, etc...

It doesn't take many Conservatives voting independently of sitting out the next election cycle to turn a slim majority into a minority.

You may see it differently, but that's the way I see it.
91 posted on 10/07/2005 8:12:12 AM PDT by Pessimist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: Pessimist
It doesn't take many Conservatives voting independently of sitting out the next election cycle to turn a slim majority into a minority.

Well, you be sure and do your part to make that all come true.

You're right about one thing though: historically speaking, "certain" so called conservatives have always used their votes as blackmail.

92 posted on 10/07/2005 8:57:01 AM PDT by Howlin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: Tolik
But the ideological confrontation with the likes of Senator Charles Schumer and the Democrat left that many of us believe is essential, including Will and Kristol, was made much more difficult thanks to the likes of McCain and the unwillingness to change the rule before any Supreme Court vacancy arose. This president has been poorly served by his Republican "allies" in this regard. Bush is the first president who has had to deal with an assault of this kind on his constitutional authority. And unless and until the filibuster rule is changed, a liberal minority in the Senate will have the upper hand.

Exactly, and that's why he picked Harriet Miers and because “there are not enough Republican votes in the Senate to win an ideological fight over a nominee like Michael Luttig, Edith Jones, or Janice Rogers Brown.”

93 posted on 10/07/2005 2:56:08 PM PDT by Victoria Delsoul
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-93 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