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

Skip to comments.

HARRIET MIERS WRITES -- YEESH
National Review Online -- The Corner ^ | October 8, 2005 | John Podhoretz

Posted on 10/08/2005 8:52:39 AM PDT by JCEccles

The lovably irascible Beldar, the Texas trial lawyer who is one of the two people on earth hotly defending the Miers nomination (the other being our buddy Hugh Hewitt), has posted a convenient link to articles written by Harriet Miers during one of her stints as a bar association honcho. He did this in part to address a charge I made on Hugh's show that Miers shouldn't be taken seriously because over the past 30 years of hot dispute on matters of constitutional law she hadn't published so much as an op-ed on a single topic of moment. Thank you, Beldar. But you shouldn't have. I mean, for Miers's sake, you really shouldn't have.

Miers's articles here are like all "Letters from the President" in all official publications -- cheery and happy-talky and utterly inane. They offer no reassurance that there is anything other than a perfectly functional but utterly ordinary intellect at work here.

Let me offer you an analogy. I was a talented high-school and college actor. I even considered trying it as a career at one time. As an adult, I've been in community theater productions (favorably reviewed in the Virginia local weekly supplement of the Washington Post, yet!) and spent a year or so performing improv comedy in New York. I'm a more than decent semi-pro. But if you took me today and gave me a leading role in the Royal Shakespeare Company where I would have to stand toe to toe with, say, Kenneth Branagh, Kevin Spacey, Meryl Streep, Kevin Kline and others, I would be hopelessly out of my depth. I would be able to give some kind of performance. But it would be a lousy performance, a nearly unwatchable performance.

Would that be because I hadn't acted at their level for a few decades? Would it be because I don't really have commensurate talent? Who knows? Who cares? I would stink. And based on the words she herself has written -- the clearest independent evidence we have of her capacity to reason and think and argue -- as a Supreme Court justice, Harriet Miers would be about as good.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: beldar; elitism; elitist; harrietmiers; johnpodhoretz; miers; podhoretz; scotus; snob
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 301-312 next last
To: MNJohnnie
Meanwhile, the watchdog group Accuracy in Media says some members of the conservative media are distorting portions of Harriett Mier's record. AIM says reports that the Supreme Court nominee is on record supporting the establishment of the International Criminal Court and homosexual adoptions are erroneous.

"There's no evidence for the charge," says AIM's Cliff Kincaid, adding that the "documents" allegedly supporting the reports have been "seriously distorted by WorldNetDaily and other outlets."

AIM also says a Chicago Sun-Times columnist is guilty of perpetuating the inaccurate reports. The columnist, Robert Novak, wrote that Miers chaired a panel the "recommended legalization of gay adoption and establishment of an International Criminal Court." But Kincaid says Miers was chair of a panel that simply passed along recommendations from various entities in the American Bar Association for consideration by members of the ABA.

AIM says "there's no evidence that [Miers] put her personal stamp of approval on those controversial positions."

41 posted on 10/08/2005 9:18:25 AM PDT by GarySpFc (Sneakypete, De Oppresso Liber)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: WashingtonSource
I couldn't agree more on Podhoretz. He can't write. He can't think. He's just a hack. His opinions are worthless.

I'm not sure about Miers but the fact that Podhoretz opposes her makes me think she may be a good choice.

42 posted on 10/08/2005 9:18:31 AM PDT by Diago (http://www.freekatie.net/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: JCEccles

Great article for a piece written by an ego-centric idiot.

Let's see one sentence about the subject, Meirs:

The rest of the piece about John Podhoretz.


It's a me, me, me, me, mini-me world


43 posted on 10/08/2005 9:19:00 AM PDT by aShepard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Clara Lou
Clara, face it. If Harriet wasn't W's pal, she'd wouldn't be on the "short list" of 10,000 for SCOTUS.

"Pal of the President" is NOT a qualification for SCOTUS.

That's just croneyism. And I DON'T trust W., not when he's left the border wide open, 4 years after 9-11, and promoted a bubble-headed cluless Barbie doll named Julie Meyers to head ICE. Even she admitted she knows NOTHING about the job. She is, in civil service terms, MAYBE a Major, being promoted to a three star general! PURE croneyism, above national security!

These are serious times, NOT a time to reward personal buddies and nieces of the powerful to critical postitions!

44 posted on 10/08/2005 9:19:13 AM PDT by Travis McGee (--- www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com ---)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

Antonin Scalia

Image hosted by TinyPic.com

Harriet Miers

Image hosted by TinyPic.com

45 posted on 10/08/2005 9:19:15 AM PDT by JCEccles
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Miss Marple

"The longer they rant, the less I respect them."

Agreed. And when they claim that publishing op-ed pieces is the test for SCOTUS, my lack of respect becomes disgust.


46 posted on 10/08/2005 9:21:06 AM PDT by hsalaw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: marktwain
Our problem is not in rarefied questions of interpretation in cases that most honest people would flip a coin over. Our problem is with cases where most honest people would see the answer as obvious, but which Elitists don't like, because it doesn't advance their policy objectives.

Well said. Obviously you have a higher degree from a top university and stand head and shoulders above the common dirt clods who usually infect this place. Everyone knows you can vote for something before you vote against it. See you around the Vinyard.

47 posted on 10/08/2005 9:21:40 AM PDT by rhombus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Travis McGee

We're infested with the same quality minds, that in the other camp, continue to slobber over all things Clinton.

Bush could nominate a steaming pile and we'd hear, Oh, such brilliant strategery!


48 posted on 10/08/2005 9:21:54 AM PDT by the gillman@blacklagoon.com ( Welcome to the Canexico Community!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: JCEccles
Oh great job with that elitism thingy, Pod.

So, first argument - Miers went to the wrong school. That one flopped.

Now, second argument - She doesn't write like an elitist snob. I doubt this will work much better.

Try again, loser.
49 posted on 10/08/2005 9:22:12 AM PDT by KingKongCobra (Trying to save the "Donner Party" from themselves.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: drt1
I hope Miers is as strict a constructionist as is sorely needed on the Court at this point in time.

When Miers nomination was first announced I phoned my buddy in Dallas and asked if any of his friends knew Miers. It turns out his dad knew her. He stated, "I have known her since she was on the city council. Even then she was a stickler for going by the city charter, and often stated the courts are out of control, and we need to get back to the Founders original intent."
50 posted on 10/08/2005 9:22:19 AM PDT by GarySpFc (Sneakypete, De Oppresso Liber)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: XeniaSt
...John Podhoretz
These people are Northeastern elitist snobs.

Poderoretz.. Elitist?!? Snob?!? Bwaaaaahaha!! That's utterly ridiculous.

Excuse me but Podhoretz is the kind of guy you'd meet at the local bowling alley or pool hall.

BTW, throwing the 'elitist' canard at CONSERVATIVES who won't drink the Kool-Aid is becoming tiresome. No... make that HAS become tiresome.

51 posted on 10/08/2005 9:23:16 AM PDT by Condor51 (Leftists are moral and intellectual parasites - Standing Wolf)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Sam the Sham

"Since when is respect for excellence snobbery ?"

Since when are the nattering nabobs of the press the ones who determine "excellence"? If they could actually do anything, they would. Since they can't, they just nitpick everyone else.


52 posted on 10/08/2005 9:23:31 AM PDT by hsalaw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Diago
the fact that Podhoretz opposes her makes me think she may be a good choice.

I agree with that, and offer this:

the fact that Kristol opposes her makes me think she may be a good choice.

53 posted on 10/08/2005 9:23:55 AM PDT by silent_jonny (Conservatism Means Optimism -- Be Optimistic!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: GarySpFc

Hope she hasn't changed during her sojourn in the Beltway! :-)


54 posted on 10/08/2005 9:24:11 AM PDT by drt1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: the gillman@blacklagoon.com

Yep. Mindless lemmings.


55 posted on 10/08/2005 9:24:55 AM PDT by Travis McGee (--- www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com ---)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: oblomov
Image hosted by TinyPic.com
And I have all the respect in the world of John Podhoretz.
56 posted on 10/08/2005 9:25:21 AM PDT by Old Seadog (Birthdays start out being fun. But too many of them will kill you..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: silent_jonny

Yeah Kristol. I just happened to run across his 2004 column recently. It was about how Bush needed to replace Cheney with McLame.

Totally reminded me why I hate that guy (Kristol).


57 posted on 10/08/2005 9:26:27 AM PDT by KingKongCobra (Trying to save the "Donner Party" from themselves.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: Miss Marple
Any opinion on this piece?

BUSH'S SUPREME COURT NOMINEE

58 posted on 10/08/2005 9:26:51 AM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach (History is soon Forgotten,)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Howlin; onyx; Clemenza; Petronski; GummyIII; SevenofNine; martin_fierro; cyncooper; EggsAckley; ...

ping


59 posted on 10/08/2005 9:28:41 AM PDT by EveningStar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JCEccles

The Constitution is a simple, straightforward document. You don't need years of training in constitutional law to get it right. You only it to get it wrong.

Besides, his analogy is terrible. The better analogy would be that she has been acting in TV and movies for the last 30 years, and now is moving to the Royal Shakespeare Company. After all, she has been a highly succesful lawyer (including White House council), not some unrealated career like a columist.


60 posted on 10/08/2005 9:30:48 AM PDT by Hugin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 301-312 next 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