Merit Scholars [Miers nomination pits snobbish D.C. conservatives against heartland conservatives]

The New Republic ^ | October 6, 2005 | Noam Scheiber

[Chickenhawk Warmonger]

I still do not believe Harry Reid's smirking endorsement. Neither do I believe Chuckie's dig about the president showing the "far right" that Bush doesn't listen to them. Can anyone say "set up?"

By the way, one thing I did read about Ms. Miers is that she fully supports the right to keep and bear arms. That was her own words in a speech she gave several years ago.

[flashbunny]

It's not just ann being ann, it's them ripping on people like krauthammer, noonan, limbaugh, etc, all because they've dared express doubt about the nomination in one way or another.

" true lack of respect for the president"

Respect is a two way street.

People love to talk about how GWB honors loyalty...and noonan nailed this in her piece - it's like he now feels he doesn't owe any loyalty to the same base that got him elected on his promise of 'judges in the mold of scalia and thomas.

Over the past few days I've seen the usual liberal tactics being used to defend this nomination. On this thread, it's the divided and conquer technique of the 'elitist' charge.

Yesterday, it was the whisper campaign that the people who are opposing this miers are doing so because they're sexists who don't want to see a woman on the bench...never mind most of her detractors wanted someone like janice rogers brown.

Heck, even yesterday I saw a freeper saying her detractors were using 'code words' to insult her....you know, just the kind of thing liberals accuse republicans of doing???

Have some people like ann crossed over a certain polite line? Yes. But on the other side, nothing will invite a vitriolic attack faster than saying you question the pick of miers. Then you're called a traitor, a troll, and told to STFU or kiss their @ss.

Some people need to take a long, hard look at what they've resorted to.

[tabsternager]

Bush is no "poor victim."

With the list of well-known strict constructionists who are eminently more qualified than she, conservative judges who studied constitutional law and know it very well, who worked hard for years in that very field -- even if she is very conservative and always votes that way when she's on the Court, the lesson will still be it's WHO YOU KNOW that gets you the top positions, and she will be one of the biggest examples of that.

[savedbygrace]

Well said.

It's a fight between party and principle.

[MIT-Elephant]

I believe the northern Midwest (IL, IA, WI, and MN) has the best educated populace in the country, in terms of having college degrees.

Even if I'm wrong, the midwest has a LOT of very good colleges in beautiful quaint Midwestern towns.

[OldFriend]

Did you mean to be posting to me?

Did I call the President a 'poor victim'?

[flashbunny]

That's what some here can't comperehend - any criticism is seen as disloyalty to the republican party and / or hatred of bush. Apparently it's impossible to have a principled objection to something a sitting republican president does.

[born in the Bronx]

This anti-elitism is getting silly beyond belief. No, not everyone who goes to Harvard is genius, and not everyone at SMU is a dolt. But the "elite" schools (including a good number west of the Mississipi) attract the brightest and most ambitious applicants in huge numbers. They are harder to get into, and they are harder to survive in--in short, the odds are in their favor. Let us please remember that "elite" means "best"--not "snootiest".
Rehnquist, Scalia and Thomas all went to "elite" schools (Stanford, Harvard, and Yale, respectively). Justice Harlan--the great conservative dissenter on the Warren Court---only went to NY Law School (probably so he could go part time). On the other hand, he was as blue-blooded as they come, got his BA from Princeton, and a Rhodes Scholarship. Elitist through and through.
Many of the conservatives who are opposing this nomination are people who normally support the President. That should make you take their objections seriously, not just brand them as "elitists."

[born in the Bronx]

It also had the University of Chicago, which includes a first-rate law school and has produced some great conservative minds.

[born in the Bronx]

Excuse me, but the President promised us a justice in the mold of Scalia and Thomas. He is giving us a corporate lawyer who has never shown any interest in Constitutional issues, belongs to the ABA but not the Federalist Society, and who can forever be pointed to as an example of Republican cronyism.

[B Knotts]

Yep. That's me: snobbish D.C. conservative! LOL! This stuff is really getting weak.

[Seydlitz]

"belongs to the ABA but not the Federalist Society"

That is a damning fact.

[Miss Marple]

I have been PO'd at a bunch of the beltway conservatives for a long time.

Kristol has thrown a monkey wrench into a lot of the administration's policies going all the way back to the spring of 2001.

Krauthammer has missed the mark quite often, beginning with his over-the-top rant against "The Passion of Christ."

Noonan spends her time dissing the President's speeches, even though most people see thonse speeches as positive, if not great.

[Chickenhawk Warmonger]

You are correct about the nastiness - but it's one thing to voice your dissent another to resort to personal attacks. Ann crossed the line. As far as the elitist label, just read some of the talking heads' columns - their words speak volumes. I'm sorry that you've been called names but unfortunately manners seem to leave along with rational thinking.

[tabsternager]

I inferred it from your words, saying your "heart breaks for him" because of something he brought upon himself.

[chae]

Thanks, you totally nailed it.

[onyx]

I am not upset at all by this nomination. She's POTUS'S choice and unless she fails miserably during her hearings, I will be happy if she just sits tight and votes with Scalia and Thomas.

[rbmillerjr]

NICE SPIN...

BUSH THE REGULAR GUY...

vs the elites (riiiiiiigggghhhhht)

[flashbunny]

limbaugh, steyn, coulter...the list goes on.

Noonan, who is probably the gentlest to express her views, gets it just as bad as anyone. "Washed up" etc.

The truth of the matter is, these people will still be around long after January 21st, 2009. And the republican party is going to need them in 2008 just as much as before.

It will be funny to see RNC heads who called them 'elitists' come back for their help when they need a little spin or good coverage to motivate the base.

The ones who are burning bridges are not the 'elitists' - they're just doing what they've always been doing, just with a different target. It's the party leaders who have been ignoring the growing discontent within the conservative base...and now they're trying to blame commentators for the problems caused by the mistakes THEY have made.

[bourbon]

LOL....You and I are such radicals, totally out of the mainstream of conservatism in this country. Just look at our whacko brethren: Rush Limbaugh, Laura Ingraham, Bill Kristol, George Will, and Ann Coulter. We should be ashamed.