Skip to comments.Bush predicts Miers confirmation (Experts hopelessly stuck in Harriet Quag-Miers)
Posted on 10/07/2005 2:38:48 PM PDT by JohnHuang2
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President George W. Bush on Friday predicted White House lawyer Harriet Miers would win confirmation to the U.S. Supreme Court despite conservative complaints including some calls to withdraw her nomination. "She'll be confirmed and ... people will see a fantastic woman who is honest, open, humble and capable of being a great Supreme Court judge," Bush said. Continues...
Experts hopelessly stuck in Harriet Quag-Miers
"I'm disappointed . . . I'm depressed . . . I'm demoralized," the Weekly Standard's William Kristol wrote. My goodness. Get back on your meds, bud. Kristol says he's depressed because he "expected President Bush to nominate someone with a visible and distinguished constitutionalist track record . . . " Someone President John McCain would pick. Or President Colin Powell.
Bush chose White House Counsel Harriet Ellan Miers. Had a hunch it wasn't gonna be Alan Dershowitz. She was born and raised in Dallas, Texas. She was educated at Southern Methodist University. Bush betrayed Harvard! Yale Law School! Bastions of conservative legal thinking.
It's a missed opportunity to pick someone from the cloistered, insular world of the judiciary. Now we're stuck with someone with real-world experience and Texas values. How unhealthy. 'This is the best qualified person for the job.' Yeah, sure (har-dee-har-har). Oops -- that was Bush's dad nominating Clarence Thomas.
She's White House Counsel, Bush's chief adviser on judicial nominations; was Bush's Deputy Chief of Staff, top domestic policy adviser; she headed up the process which gave us John Roberts. She supports restrictions on federal funding on embryonic stem cell research, is a patron of a Texas pro-life group, attends a pro-life evangelical church, opposes gay marriage . . . gee, wonder if she leans right or left -- any idea?
As head of the Texas bar, she fought the ABA's pro-abortion stance, urging the ABA's policy-making committee to put the abortion issue to a vote. Which means Miers wants voters deciding the issue of abortion. The N.O.W. gang will love her. "Surely this is a pick from weakness," says Kristol. Bush's "weak" because of Katrina, Michael Brown, and charges of "cronyism." So he picks a "crony" in "capitulation." Makes perfect sense now.
Sen. Patrick Leahy blasted Miers for her notorious reputation of "being loyal to this president," pointing to her mile-long rap sheet of "serving as a close (Bush) adviser and in working to advance his objectives," rather than working to advance Leahy's objectives.
Bush chose Miers the same way he chose Cheney. I wonder how that turned out.
The case against Miers per the Kristol camp: She's a Bush loyalist. She gave Al Gore's '88 campaign $1,000 for inventing the Internet. She's not a Bush loyalist. Too old and inexperienced. Safe pick. We know nothing about her. Other than a long and distinguished career, no track record. Dangerous pick. She's a stealth candidate. We know everything about her. That's how we know she's no conservative. OK, she may be conservative, but only 'cuz she's surrounded by conservatives. No telling what'll happen once she sits on the bench next to Roberts, Thomas and Scalia. Bush says she's conservative. But what does he know? He didn't consult with William Kristol. 'Sides, you never gamble on someone you've known for only over 10 years. You go with Kristol's solid advice. He doesn't know her.
Anyway, Bush didn't need a "stealth candidate." Not with Senate Republicans in charge -- Republicans like John Warner, Arlen Specter, Susan Collins, Olympia Snowe, Chuck Hagel, George Voinovich, Mike Dewine, Lincoln Chafee, John McCain. Real fighters! You can always count on that crowd.
But some Democrats are happy about this pick -- a sure sign Miers is really a liberal.
Sen. Joe Lieberman said he thinks this "is a credible nominee, and not one that, as far as we know now, has a record that in any sense could be described as extremist."
Sen. Mark Pryor said his "sense is, so far, so good."
According to a report in the Omaha World-Herald, Sen. Ben Nelson "said he will wait to decide how he'll vote until after the Senate's confirmation hearings," but "he sees nothing now that would derail" the nomination.
Sen. Harry Reid praised the nominee, telling reporters that "the President has chosen someone with suitable legal credentials."
Sen. Dianne Feinstein was ebullient, telling CNN that, from what she's heard, she's convinced the nominee is "qualified, yes. I don't think (the nominee is) an extremist."
Sen. Barack Obama was effusive, noting that the candidate "clearly has the legal background and intellect to serve."
Sen. Jon Corzine was effusive, too: "I think the White House did its homework. They found an individual that is brilliant, clearly capable as a jurist."
Sen. Dick Durbin heaped praise on the nominee as someone "legally skilled, a very bright" individual who "has no questions related to . . . honesty or ethics that I'm aware of. And a good temperament."
Oh, wait -- all 8 quotes above were about John Roberts. Back in July, before the hearings. Sorry.
The New York Post's John Podhoretz writes that "it is highly unlikely that (Miers) will be a good Supreme Court justice, because there is no indication in her 35 years in professional life that she has intellectual interests, that she has committed herself to the study of Constitutional theory and practice or even that she can write a decent English sentence. And it beggars reason to think that a person at the age of 60 can suddenly emerge as an intellectual powerhouse."
I see. It takes an "intellectual powerhouse" to look at the Constitution and find that gay marriage isn't in there. Sorry, Charlie. To paraphrase William Buckley, I'd rather be governed by the first hundred names in the Texas phone book than 100 Harvard "intellectual powerhouses."
If you think Miers is a David Souter, here's what you have to believe. Miers knew George W. Bush would run for President someday, so she fought the ABA on abortion, faked her evangelical Christian conversion, pretended to be a conservative, tithed from her income, gave to pro-life causes, taught Sunday school for 10 years, got active in GOP causes, attended church regularly, secretly contacted Souter for tips -- all of this to infiltrate the Bush inner circle and keep Bush from moving the Court to the right. Years and years of laboring as a mole -- then voila! Bush names her for SCOTUS. The plan worked. Abortion's now safe! Podhoretz says Miers probably can't "write a decent English sentence," but boy is she a Machiavellian genius!
Here's the genius of the Bush Team: Before the nominee was announced, the White House floated lots of trial balloons of possible nominees -- names garanteed to scare the bejesus out of libbies. This goes on for weeks. Libbies create a run on antidepressants. Then -- just when liberals expect Bush to name Michael Luttig or Pope Benedict XVI to the bench -- Bush introduces this soft-spoken, genial and reassuring individual. His name is John Roberts. Libbies seem relieved. We won! It wasn't the Pope! Some conservatives worry he's another Souter. Why pick a stealth candidate? Bush has a record of appointing excellent conservatives to the bench, so why trust him now? Then out come the John Roberts White House memos. Conservatives are relieved. Democrats are split.
Let's see now, before the Miers announcement, lots of trial balloons were floated of possible nominees. Democrats create another run on antidepressants. Then -- just when libbies expect Bush to name William Bennett to the bench -- Bush introduces this soft-spoken, genial and reassuring individual, Harriet Miers. Liberals seem relieved. We won! It wasn't William Bennett! Conservatives worry she's a Souter with boobs. Why a stealth candidate? Stay tuned. Libbies are about to blow their gaskets.
My Two Cents...
Have a great weekend, y'all. God bless.
Good article...not the Reuters stuff, yours. 8)
LOL. I just loved it. All of it.
OUTSTANDING analysis and essay. Thank you.
I think it's the best I've seen.
Pod said that?
What an ass.
In their attempts to diminish Miers, her critics have mostly diminished themselves instead.
You've been right about everything up until now. But...
How do we know we can trust you on this one?
Would he have said the same thing about a male WH counsel who had led a large law firm?
I tend to doubt it.
Excellent, as always. I love the faith that our super-con group places on this list of wimps:
John Warner, Arlen Specter, Susan Collins, Olympia Snowe, Chuck Hagel, George Voinovich, Mike Dewine, Lincoln Chafee, John McCain. Real fighters! You can always count on that crowd.
Bullseye JH2 ~ Bump!
Somebody President John McCain would pick ... HA You've got to be kidding me.
Brave Sir Robin ran away,
Bravely ran away, away.
When danger reared its ugly head, he bravely turned his tail and fled.
Long time, no talk.
The only voters she wanted to vote were members of the ABA. The only thing she wanted them to vote on was whether to adopt a pro-abortion policy. It's a real stretch to morph that into an anti-Roe position.
Nice try, but you're still asking for an implicit faith and I can't do that. Besides, some things are still worth fighting for and even losing.
If you look at this nomination from the point of view of the President, and you believe that he truly wants to be sure he appoints another Scalia or Thomas instead of a Souter, then given the weasel Senate Republicans, the difficulty of confirmation in general, and his knowledge of Miers's character, it makes a lot more sense.
Brilliant strategery from the misunderestimated President.
Another great essay, friend.
Thank you...you have been missed.
Do you have proof that any of the other nominees would actually overturn Roe?
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.