Is the president's crony good enough for the court?

San Diego Union-Tribune ^ | October 9, 2005 | Stuart Taylro, Jr.

[HiTech RedNeck]

Some avid Bush supporters who have met with her have come away underwhelmed by her acuity and Milquetoast personality, as well as unsure of her convictions.

Who gives a squat how she comes off in conversation. What counts is what she's done.

[DogBarkTree]

Is she a crony or another O'Conner? Funny how this debate has taken shape.

[jdm]

"No more Getty Images!!!!"

[RoadTest]

"What counts is what she's done."

No. What counts is what she will do.

"If then ye have judgments of things pertaining to this life, set them to judge who are least esteemed in the church. " 1Cor. 6:4

Seems to me everybody's criticism of Harriet Miers is that she's "least esteemed", the very thing that may qualify her the most.

[BCrago66]

False. How she "comes off in conversation" affects her persuasiveness to other Justices in conference, for one thing. And she comes off like a lady who has just a little bit too much trouble figuring things out.

[bmwcyle]

Bush give up someone younger and a sure thing.

[G.Mason]

At last! An article that lays out the opinions of the authors allegations, pro and con, and to the points.

Now ... If the Senate hearings will only do the same, we are in business.

I really doubt that the Senate will poll FR and decide the fate of Harriet Miers base on that poll, so there is no need for FR to get all lathered up over this, unless os course, we wish to.

Yo ... pass the soap, you moron!

[Republican Wildcat]

I didn't know personality was that important?

[HiTech RedNeck]

Thomas isn't much of a talker either.

[Republican Wildcat]

And she comes off like a lady who has just a little bit too much trouble figuring things out.

So you've met with her? When did this happen?

[BCrago66]

BTW, Mr. Taylor is wrong when he calls Mr. Douglas a "William Douglas." That guy was a nut, and his opinions substandard.

[HiTech RedNeck]

Does anyone actually have a bonafide script of an interview with her? Not this "Warren who?" which I haven't seen anything but hearsay about?

It's ludicrous to think that a lawyer who has done as well as she has, found herself tongue tied in court.

[harpu]

"Is the president's crony good enough for the court?"

NO, the question should be; "Is the president's word that Ms. Miers is his RIGHT choice for the the court?"

AND, to me; a lifelong senior republican, his character - in all (or at least most) matters since becoming our president - gives me comfort that Ms. Miers is something more than just cronyism!

[Do not dub me shapka broham]

Yes, she's also a concession to preferential, i.e. discriminatory, hiring practices at the highest levels of government...during a REPUBLICAN administration, no less!

I'll go with Barry "Mr. Conservative" Goldwater on this particular issue.

Inverse discrimination is wrong.

It's always wrong, but especially when it is being used to determine who shall dispense justice at the highest court in the land.

[BCrago66]

Thomas doesn't talk much from the bench. But even though I was young at the time, I read some of his DC Court of Appeals decisions and some of his articles and interviews before his 1991 nomination, and his intelligence was quite evident. I've also seen Justice Thomas on C-Span speak ably and intelligently in extemporaneous Q and A sessions.

Thomas just doesn't like to preen and ask a question at oral argument, when the answer is in the written briefs or covered by another Justice's question.

Maybe I'm wrong, and Miers will speak like Roberts in a skirt at the conformation hearings. I sure hope so.

[BCrago66]

I met her on C-Span. Not a personal meeting, thus my impression is no guaranty. But I didn't see brilliance shining though. Look for yourself (the 1st 2 clips under Davids Frum's picture):

http://12.170.145.150/homepage.asp?Cat=Current_Event&Code=SCourt&ShowVidNum=40&Rot_Cat_CD=SCourt&Rot_HT=&Rot_WD=&ShowVidDays=365&ShowVidDesc=&ArchiveDays=365

[Mobilemitter]

"A few presidential cronies have, of course, turned out to be notable justices. They include Robert Jackson, Hugo Black and Felix Frankfurter, all appointed by President Franklin Roosevelt. But each of them had been a legal or political giant of independent stature...."

Goliath: 0 David : 1

If we ever needed a 'David' on the bench, it is now.

[Do not dub me shapka broham]

Actually, I'd much prefer a Solomon.

[MikeHu]

Does anybody else find it amusing that the most mediocre minds and writers are criticizing the President and his decisions as though they were legends in everybody else's minds -- just because they are flattered to be asked to sign their names to hit pieces authored by MoveOn.org?

Practically every two-bit hack seems to have been conned into thinking they are signing an original piece that every other liberal hack has also claimed they wrote (and gotten paid for). Has one noticed that all the criticism against Miers runs along the same lines? The President is not the most brillaint person in the world -- but that writer is, and totally qualified to diss everybody else.

The characteristic trait of people who are "nobodies" is that they think "somebodies" go around kicking "nobodies" like themselves -- as proof of how powerful and important they are.