Posted on 10/08/2005 9:48:36 PM PDT by Map Kernow
President George W Bush's controversial nomination of his friend Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court was an act of "political tone deafness" that would harm the Republicans' election prospects, according to the leader of America's largest grassroots conservative organisation.
David Keene, the chairman of the American Conservative Union, gave his scathing assessment to The Sunday Telegraph as senior White House aides fought to stem the Republican revolt over Mr Bush's court choice.
This weekend Robert Bork, an ultra-conservative judge who was himself the focus of a bitter Supreme Court nomination battle under the Reagan administration, became the latest in a string of prominent figures on the Right to criticise Mr Bush.
Ms Miers' nomination was "a disaster on every level" and a "slap in the face" to conservatives, said Mr Bork, whose own appointment was eventually blocked by Democrats. She had "no experience with constitutional law whatever", he complained, describing conservative reactions as veering between "disapproval and outrage".
The fury from the Right at Mr Bush's choice has opened a new front for the White House, already under pressure over Iraq and domestic economic problems.
Mr Bush has testily rejected calls by a growing band of conservatives for his candidate to be withdrawn.
Yesterday he highlighted Ms Miers' high-flying legal career - she was once his personal lawyer in Texas and now serves as White House counsel - and evangelical beliefs in his weekly radio address.
At a time when his approval ratings have dipped below 40 per cent the President chose a nominee with no judicial track record, largely to avoid a bruising battle with Democrats who were expected to oppose better-known conservative candidates.
The move has backfired with Right-wing and religious groups. They have long dreamt of reshaping the highest court with a solid conservative majority, and turned out their supporters to vote for Mr Bush last year after he promised on the campaign trail to achieve that.
They now fear that that goal is in danger as Ms Miers, whose constitutional views are largely unknown, has been chosen to replace a crucial swing voter on a court that often splits five to four.
"The White House's agenda is being determined by events and by the Democrats. They're drifting," said Mr Keene. "The President is clearly off his game. He was reeling from Hurricane Katrina and struggling over the war and clearly didn't want a fight. But now he's got one with his own base."
Although Ms Miers is expected to be confirmed if she does not withdraw, the battle will be bruising.
Leading conservative Republican senators such as Sam Brownback, Trent Lott and Rick Santorum have already indicated that they will find it difficult to support her.
The strongest calls for her withdrawal have come from powerful conservative commentators such as George Will and Charles Krauthammer, in The Washington Post, and Bill Kristol, the editor of the Weekly Standard. All are seen as representing important strands on the Right. The appointment is so significant because the Supreme Court is the ultimate judicial arbiter on such touchstone issues as abortion, gay rights, private property and the role of religion in public life.
Even James Dobson, who as president of Focus on the Family is one of the country's most powerful Christian leaders, is apparently rethinking his initial support for Ms Miers.
Karl Rove, the President's closest adviser, had personally called Mr Dobson to solicit his support by emphasising Ms Miers' evangelical beliefs. But Mr Dobson has now said he feels "fear and trepidation" in endorsing her and he has not asked listeners to his popular radio show to campaign for her.
Mr Keene, who heads the country's largest conservative grassroots organisation, said that Mr Bush's domestic political agenda - most notably, his much-vaunted plans for pension and tax reform - was now crippled and Republican candidates could suffer from the fall-out in congressional elections next year.
The Democrats are saying little as the White House handles a series of headaches. The American death toll in Iraq is fast approaching 2,000 and Mr Bush's handling of Hurricane Katrina is still dogging him.
There they go again! Sheesh!
One day they say that Bush turned yellow and ran scared from the RINOs and the next day they say Bush turned yellow and ran scared from the Democrats. I really wish they would make up their minds - - which is it?
And, given the fact that if Miers WERE to come out and say "I'm for overturning Roe...I want to undo ALL the damage this Court has done"...just how many votes would she get from the "Dumba$$ 14", or any OTHER DemonRAT...would she get a better shake than JBR...Owens...ect?
See, she's NOT going to say ANYTHING substantive in these hearings...and this "Let's hear fom her" is a smokescreen for "I'm already supporting my "Glorious Leader's" decision, now we need to twist some arms and horsetrade behind the scenes" for a candidate that would NOT be a Candidate if she wasn't a Bush Crony!
See, we have NO historical basis for knowing her views...so Bush says "Trust Me"...now the only basis for approving this choice is his LONG-TIME personal relationship with her...that IS the definition of a "Crony!" Gee, how would you describe Julie Meyers at ICE? Was SHE the "best Candidtae" for the job? Ooops...I guess since Michele Malkin is the source of this artice, it's already all"BS" to you, since she's a pundit who is "Not of the Body"...
If this was a Clinton pic...would you trust him? Do you trust ANY politician? If so, you REALLY need to up your meds!
This "Cult of Bush" is killing this country!
I am not going to knee jerk based on rank speculation and that's that. I respect that you have strong feelings on this matter but the fact that I see things differently than you do doesn't make me part of any cult of Bush. It simply means I take other things into account. Labeling people when they disagree with you is a disgusting lib tactic and I would hope you were above that.
Like this.
http://presidentaristotle.blogspot.com/2005/10/case-for-miers-when-things-look-blurry.html
Actually, I think Nixon nominated Rehnquist after Carswell. But regardless, I don't know if Carswell was nominated for his views on abortion. Or Blackmun.
And the basic point about Carswell is that Nixon nominated him in a fit of pique, after Haynsworth failed. Carswell's problem, in addition to the lack of experience and "mediocrity" problem, was that he was on record endorsing "white supremacy" in the 1940's. Sort of like if the present nominee had endorsed having pro-abort speakers at a law school.
Speculation is that Bush nominated her because he needs a friendly vote on "War on Terror" issues, not for anything having to do with views on abortion, and other social issues dear to his base. However, as Krauthammer has pointed out, her work as White House counsel may disqualify her from hearing such issues. So, as you and so many others asked, "WHAT WAS BUSH THINKING?" (If he was thinking...)
Yes, keep it up!
This country, this movement, this party.
It would be sad, if it weren't so infuriating.
The vast majority of conservatives are in a mode of thought to either support this nominee or wait and see for the hearings. I think the FR poll showed about 70% as the sum of these two positions. The kneejerk opponents are a minority and will not be swayed regardless of the hearings (and frankly, also regardless of how she votes on the court. They just wanted to have a losing fight with the Dems).
But, to their credit, the current Miers opponents will also wisely evaluate their best interests next year and act, and vote, to prevent Democrats from taking GOP seats.
And that's that. In 2 months all this will be off the radar screen.
Sorry Jeremiah. I didn't catch the sarcasm-----sounds like you're one of the good guys.
I don't know if I am a good guy, but thanks.
"Aside from the absent Y chromosome, what exactly is the difference between the two?"
Good question! Exactly my point. You need to have an answer to this question before you spin all over it.
By the way, how do you italicize text on this thing?
Thanks.
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.