Petulant Right: The Right's Problem Is With Him, Not Her

The Charleston [WV] Daily Mail ^ | October 6, 2005 | Don Surber

[quidnunc]

Harriet Miers is the whipping boy for Bush's mistakes

Promptly at 8 a.m. Monday, President Bush announced his next appointee for the Supreme Court.

By 9 a.m. the nominee had been denounced as a crony, too unknown and too lightweight.

The dead-on-arrival pronouncements came not from the usual caustic acronyms of the left — NARAL, NOW, PFAW — but from the right.

Conservative cannibalism had begun. The left enjoyed the entertainment.

Why not? Politics often is NASCAR, and people hang around to see who crashes.

The workaday Dale Earnhardts have their Jeff Gordon president in their sights.

This is not about Harriet Miers, an eminently qualified lawyer who made her bones in the real world of corporate law, placing her skills on the marketplace and succeeding.

She is not some elitist professor or some lifer appellate judge. Miers became the first woman lawyer at a big Dallas law firm, and then worked her way to managing partner, the CEO of 400 lawyers.

Along the way she had the temerity to challenge whether the American Bar Association should endorse abortion.

If post-Reagan conservatives cannot endorse her, then they should go back to their glory days of John Birch and opposition to the fluoridation of water.

But this is not about her nomination. Heck, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, a former lawyer for the American Civil Liberties Union, won confirmation with only three nay votes.

This is about President Bush. Conservatives are fed up with him, and their list of particulars is credible. Not everyone has the same list, but these seem to be the big ones.

-snip-

[thoughtomator]

I still have yet to see a single piece of evidence that would point to Miers being "a committed conservative constitutional originalist". The only source of those claims that I have found is the wishful thinking of those who are hoping for the best.

It almost seems as if the right wing is what is being "borked" here - there are more attacks against those raising valid objections than efforts to answer those objections. That very phenomenon points strongly to the conclusion that Miers is exactly what conservatives don't want.

After all, if she was all her boosters say she is, why have such terrible problems considering and answering reasonable questions? That's not how straight-up people respond to requests for information.

[rhombus]

The facts are the liberals are smarter than we are. Their President found two known leftists and got them appointed. There was no question where Ginsberg and Breyer stood, no need to guess how they would vote and both ended up being reliable votes for the left. I'd like to see the Republicans use the same strategy before anyone posting here is dead, but it doesn't seem to likely to happen.

I feel your pain. So how do we get there? We can divorce ourselves which means we go back to being a minority party. Maybe that'll learn 'em some but I'm not sure most will really get the message. Or, we can grumble through the '06 elections and keep pressuring RINOs to grow a spine. At the same time we can try and get a more conservative presidential candidate a little more exposure. These polls for Rudy and Condi are just face recognition at this point. The favorite conservative names I hear on this site aren't known at all to Walmart shoppers.

[Ol' Sparky]

No, the acceptance by conservatives with the political IQ of room temperature is getting annoying. We can't win if conservatives are stupid enough to continue to accept the "stealth" candidate strategy, which has failed for 25 years.

[RebelBanker]

Please do not confuse the Republican Party with Conservatives. There are too many RINOs and self-aggrandizing moonbats on our side of the aisle to trust them to follow the President if he nominated a well known conservative. A Robert Bork confirmation debacle would cripple the President at just the time that he does not have a lot of political capital to spend.

[cksharks]

Been so long since I replied that my pc went nuts. I only hit post once. Promise

[beeler]

He's obviously afraid of the fallout from the MSM that would have resulted from an appointment of a committed constitutionalist to the SCOTUS. At least to some degree.

[Ol' Sparky]

By the time the hearings occur, it will be too late. We're going to learn nothing in these hearings about where Miers stands on the issues.

The only chance to assure a change in the direction of the court is for the nomination to be pulled or defeated and a knonw originalist to be nominated. That's why the pressure needs to intensify, not lessen.

[SmithL]

This is a must-read. The President has done a lot of things that have upset me, but this isn't one of them. The people that complain about Miers don't understand where she stands on the issues. I'm convinced that this President knows exactly where she stands on every issue of imprtance. I'm also convinced that if the Right is successful in defeating her, they're going to be even more unhappy with her replacement.

[Conspiracy Guy]

Who gets to nominate candidates to SCOTUS?

You?

Who gets to vote yes or no?

You?

And if you think your IQ is above mine.

Strike 3.

[RebelBanker]

Our own Congressman Billybob wrote an excellent analysis of the situation, posted here:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1497718/posts

The problem I see with "verifiable" is that it translates into "Borkable" by the Dems and their RINO allies.

[Pompah]

Words mean things. And you Didn't answer my question.

[markedman]

"There are too many RINOs and self-aggrandizing moonbats on our side of the aisle to trust them to follow the President if he nominated a well known conservative. A Robert Bork confirmation debacle would cripple the President at just the time that he does not have a lot of political capital to spend."

Bush is part of the problem. I think in truth, most of even the complaining Republican Conservative senators know that Miers really is a _VERY_ Conservative pick. I think this has a little air of retribution to it. Lott has still not forgiven the RINO Republicans for abandoning him - rather throwing him to the Democrat wolves, and other Conservatives are pissed at Bush for squandering the hard won political capital of last November.

I remember that Bork hearing. That was terrible. But it was during those hearings that I became a life long fan of Alan Simpson.

[markedman]

"There are too many RINOs and self-aggrandizing moonbats on our side of the aisle to trust them to follow the President if he nominated a well known conservative. A Robert Bork confirmation debacle would cripple the President at just the time that he does not have a lot of political capital to spend."

Bush is part of the problem. I think in truth, most of even the complaining Republican Conservative senators know that Miers really is a _VERY_ Conservative pick. I think this has a little air of retribution to it. Lott has still not forgiven the RINO Republicans for abandoning him - rather throwing him to the Democrat wolves, and other Conservatives are pissed at Bush for squandering the hard won political capital of last November.

I remember that Bork hearing. That was terrible. But it was during those hearings that I became a life long fan of Alan Simpson.

[beeler]

Yes I did. GWB is frightened of the MSM. He is a coward.

[NeoCaveman]

We've had FOUR stealth candidates appointed by Republican Presidents in the past 25 years. Only ONE ended up being an originalist

Clarence Thomas.

Of course he was pushed on the White House by the Free Congress foundation, so they knew who he was.

[NeoCaveman]

The problem I see with "verifiable" is that it translates into "Borkable" by the Dems and their RINO allies.

Does anyone really believe that red state democrats up for reelection would have risked their seats tp vote against a known conservative judge?

[Conspiracy Guy]

Get real

[beeler]

Why didn't he nominate a known constitutionalist then?

[A Texan]

I agree. I use to be a huge supporter of Bush and I am to a certain extent reserving my judgment on this pick, but over the past few years Bush either lost his nerve when dealing with the MSM and/or public opinion. Bring back the President would said "wanted dead or alive", "bring it on" and who told the UN screw off we'll handle Iraq.

I understand he doesn't follow polls, but he better start listening to his conservative base, and he better do it soon.

[roses of sharon]

Why don't you run for office?