Dubya the gambler will enjoy the last laugh

Jewish World Review ^ | 10/7/05 | Tony Snow

[pookie18]

The Harriet Miers nomination has set off one of the most delightful psychodramas in recent Washington history. President Bush, the habitual iconoclast, shattered prevailing traditions and expectations by asking his former personal attorney and now-White House counsel to assume a seat on the U.S. Supreme Court.

Elites hate the nomination. Miers, in contrast to the polymath John Roberts, has little direct experience with constitutional law, and may know less about cases and precedents than such potential inquisitors as Sens. Joe Biden and Chuck Schumer. She hasn't spent time on the federal bench. She hasn't written sage articles for prestigious law reviews. She has little conventional pedigree — and that drives the local elites nuts.

Conservative activists also count themselves unamused. Sen. George Allen told the Richmond Times-Dispatch that of the 100 phone calls his office got on the Meirs pick before noon last Monday, only three supported the president's pick.

Many conservatives wanted the president to duke it out with Senate Democrats by selecting a known and documented constitutional originalist — Judges Michael Luttig, Michael McConnell, Edith Jones and Janice Rogers Brown topped many wish lists. The president, the thinking went, not only could have established himself as the King of Capitol Hill, he also could have killed the recent Democratic tactic of slurring and smearing conservative judicial picks.

[RoadTest]

I don't know what more the conservative critics want. As I read her qualifications and philosophy I perceive that Harriet Miers is the very candidate the Democrats feared most. She thinks like Dubya!

But they'll accept her. Ried even recommended her!

[Trust but Verify]

Make that A LOT more cowbell!

[DooDahhhh]

let's just go for a cowbell solo!!

[Prophet in the wilderness]

If anything, this will be a topic of discussion for years to come.

I didn't say I was for or against Harriet Meirs ( even though, I would have liked to see Micheal Luttig chosen , and was initially disappointed ),, I am just being unsure of this nomination.
What I am worried about, and most are worried about is ?
Will she change her spots in 10, 15, 20, years from now, and become a liberal activist judge on the bench, and make new laws from the bench, can we really take her's , and the President's word for it ?
I think most Americans are sick and tired of the Liberal activist tyrannical judges railroading the public, and voters.
I don't think any Supreme Court Judge should refer to, or base their ideology, or base their judgments and belief system on " Foreign Law " .
American laws that pertain to AMERICANS should be made by and from the US Constitution, the US state legislatures, and Congress, and the American public.

[SkyPilot]

Tony, I greatly appreciate the comment and the insight you gave. Correctly, you have observed that what is motivating the outrage of Conservatives is the horrible legacy of past SCOTUS nominees by Republican Administrations that turned out to be disastrous. A visual helps frame this:

Moreover, a usually adept Bush White House has taken a clumsy approach towards trying to beat down skepticism towards Miers. National Review Online says she isn't tough enough to stand up to the Liberals on the Court and the Washington Post Style section. The White House then releases interviews of friends who said getting a memo past her was "the gauntlet" and that she "spits nails." She is discovered to have contributed to Al Gore and Lloyd Bentson, so the White House tells us she is a born-again Christian.

Can you imagine if the White House had gone to such lengths with Justice Roberts? We would have been gifted with releases of his First Communion Mass book and pictures of his Confirmation at age 15. I too am a evangelical Christian, but this was "spin." Who is to say how mature her faith is?

Sir--I appreciate your service. You are correct in what you said about your defense of Justice Thomas. That was the last "broken coke bottle" nomination process we had. That man was bloodied by lesser men and women who stood in judgment against him. Let us not dance around the reason they did this to him either: abortion. Sadly, when Clinton had his turn to nominate a jurist, he was able to pick a radical ACLU lawyer, who never answered one question about her ugly past, and showed Sen Biden and the Committee colored drawings of her made by her grandchildren. She passed 97-3.

I think Carl Rove was too clever by half with this nominee. Stealth? You betcha. A hail Mary pass over everyone's head? Yup. Did he foresee how angry the base would be over this "most qualified in the nation" nominee?

Lastly, we must ask ourselves: "Why is this man smiling?"

Thanks again Mr. Snow for what you do.

[mathluv]

Ed Gillespie was on Tony's show yesterday, and had an interesting comment. No one knows 'who' was on the list, and no one knows how many may have been asked and may have said 'no thanks'. Who wants to undergo the anal exam by the Senate dims and the press?

[Just mythoughts]

Certainly has been interesting watching the upper class of conservatives come unglued. Guess we could call this "hurricane Harriet" breaking open the levies of elitist conservatives, a collective blast of soaked powder.

[mathluv]

and many dims/libs underestimate him.

[mathluv]

Hqave you listened to what he has had to say about it? He has covered it on his show.

[saveliberty]

Sorry for my misunderstanding.

I do think that W is very concerned about not repeating a Souter and I think that he has been careful here, even if unconventional in his approach. If he weren't convinced she'd stay conservative, he wouldn't have selected her.

Also just as a reference, W has selected great judicial nominees up until this one. It's worth letting her win conservative folks over in the hearings.

I also think that a panel of philosopher kings, even if judicial conservatives, may spell disaster in that you wind up with personality wars. Roberts is brilliant, but he's not flashy like Scalia. Miers is no slouch either -- I think it's great to draw a candidate from a background in which the candidate is accountable to a boss -- whether to be accurate, on time or a good team player.

My two cents :-)

[Prophet in the wilderness]

Hey Tony, how are you ?
Hope it's a great show today.
I heard on the show a few days ago were you were trying to ask George Allen if he is going to run for President in 2008.
From your experience, and instincts, do you think he is going to run for President ? and do you think he could win ?

[GarySpFc]

The blog you posted regarding Miers is one of the very best analysis of the lady I have seen. She is an excellent choice for those of us who would like to see a Biblical pro-life conservative on SCOTUS.

[JCEccles]

Miers, in contrast to the polymath John Roberts, has little direct experience with constitutional law, and may know less about cases and precedents than such potential inquisitors as Sens. Joe Biden and Chuck Schumer. She hasn't spent time on the federal bench. She hasn't written sage articles for prestigious law reviews.

In short, she's an ignorant intellectual lightweight, a token, and a crony.

Somehow, that makes her a "superior" choice for the most important judicial body in America?

[arjay]

Great article.

[GarySpFc]

Like you, I want no more Souters -- and, like you (or so I gather), I don't think Harriet Miers is the best possible nominee.

I was likewise dubious of Souter. However, I have read many things regarding this lady's walk with the Lord, and I am 100% convinced she will be anything but a Souter. I am a member of an independent Christian Church affiliated, which is affiliated with Valley View Christian in Dallas where she attends. I CAN TELL YOU FOR A FACT SOUTER WOULD NEVER ATTEND A STRONG BIBLE BELIEVING CHURCH LIKE VALLEY VIEW. Additionally, Hecht stated she reads the Bible as an originalist. A PRO-CHOICE LIBERALS NEVER READ THEIR BIBLE SEEKING ORIGINAL INTENT. Furthermore, the lady has been a Bible believing Christian for 25 years, and is so grounded the chances of her changing on the court like Souter are zero.

[COBOL2Java]

When critics yelped, White House aides panicked. For some reason, they failed to anticipate the conservative blowback, and when negative reviews began pouring in, presidential aides issued snarky retorts. (One pro-Miers website dismissed all the nominee's detractors as "naval gazers.")

I was a naval gazer when just a lad. Enjoyed watching all those ships come in the New York harbor... ;-)

[saveliberty]

It's a good one. There's a lot that I learned also from Beldar Blog. Beldar is a crusty conservative Texas attorney and I have found him very reliable in the past.

He also knows Harriet Miers personally and has been working with Hugh Hewitt to defend her against people leaping to conclusions (and he actually caught a reputable journalist in posting untruths, which were later retracted)

He's posted a lot of information, so you may want to save this for when you have extra time for reading.

http://beldar.blogs.com/beldarblog/

[COBOL2Java]

I just wish O'Connor would have remembered to take that napkin off after leaving the cafeteria... :0)

[GarySpFc]

Yikes! I'm sorry for the grammatical errors, and not reading my post prior to posting. I likewise need my coffee.

[saveliberty]

LOL! Perhaps there should be Garanimals for SCOTUS. RBG isn't fashion savvy either.