Posted on 10/10/2005 8:48:14 AM PDT by Reagan Man
The fear in the pit of the stomach was palatable; sweat oozed from the brow of every conservative with an internet connection. On the afternoon of November 2, 2004, online reports of early exit polls posted indicated that John Kerry would likely be the next president of the United States.
In the second consecutive election-year frenzy -- recall the panic in 2000 when TV reporters initially botched the Supreme Court's ruling on Bush v Gore -- reports of George W. Bush's demise have been greatly exaggerated.
Similar feelings of dread and despair seized the president's supporters on Monday when news of his latest appointee to the high court surfaced. Reacting precisely the way the mainstream media dreams of, those on the right reacted viscerally when the name announced was not Janice Rogers Brown, Priscilla Owen or Michael Luttig, but little-known Harriet Miers.
Across the conservative spectrum early condemnations of Miss Miers rang out. Charges of betrayal thundered through cyberspace and accusations of capitulation filled TV screens everywhere. All this despite the fact that the man who nominated Miers is the same man who nominated John Bolton, John Ashcroft and Donald Rumsfeld.
Though the president has picked a few Cabinet clunkers, he has a stellar conservative record when it comes to judicial appointments; nominating Miguel Estrada, Priscilla Owens, William Pryor, Michael McConnell and yes, John Roberts who was also initially pilloried by some on the right.
And it is no small detail that Miss Miers was in charge of selecting and vetting these fine judges and that she spearheaded the search for the seat for which she is now under consideration. This fact should not be overlooked by those who remember that Dick Cheney was also in charge of filling what turned out to be his own position.
There are cries of "cronyism" from both sides of the political aisle, inferring that her relationship with President Bush somehow makes her less worthy a candidate. But conservatives should revel in this charge as liberals are constantly pointing out that he prefers surrounding himself with like-minded thinkers. Here's hoping she is also a crony of, Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas and Roberts, whom she is said to admire judicially.
To liberals, what's scarier than any space alien is that Miss Miers is an E.C.; an Evangelical Christian. Worse, as president of the Texas Bar Association, she led the fight against the ABA's adoption of a pro-abortion platform back in 1992. There are those who say she merely wanted political matters out of the legal purview, but isn't that the conservative position?
Some conservatives are put off by the fact that she donated money to Al Gore and Lloyd Bensten during the eighties. A lawyer looking to do business in Democratically controlled Texas during that period generally donated to both parties. The truth is many people supported conservative Democrats until they took a decided turn to the left with the nomination of the Clinton Twins.
Many fear that her lack of a track record could lead to a Miers defection to the left. One of the reasons many give for the change of direction for supposed conservatives on the Court is that they become corrupted by the Beltway social circle, yet Miss Miers has been on the ground in DC for five years and is reported to be no more affected by the atmosphere than is her boss.
Although they were not "stealth" candidates such as Miss Miers has been painted, Justices Kennedy and O'Connor never hung as millstones around the neck of Ronald Reagan in conservative lore. No one knows or ever can know for certain how a justice will act once on the bench, but maybe we should taken her at her word when she said in her acceptance speech:
"It is the responsibility of every generation to be true to the founders' vision of the proper role of the courts in our society. If confirmed, I recognize that I will have a tremendous responsibility to keep our judicial system strong, and to help ensure that the courts meet their obligations to strictly apply the laws and the Constitution."
Despite predictions of doom and gloom -- most melodious to liberal ears -- those on the right should respect President Bush's history of outstanding judicial appointments and cut the lady some slack. There will be plenty of opportunity for recrimination should either she or Roberts fail the president and their oath to uphold the Constitution.
Amen.
Who are the "defeatists"? The ones who want to nominate a well qualified conservative, or the ones who have given up and are supporting this complete unknown with minimal qualifications?
She doens't get it, Whats going on is not so much condemnation of Miers but condemnation of the President.
Just enough to hang herself?
Since President Bush has nominated so many true conservatives to the bench, and has proven himself surprisingly canny at outsmarting liberals in the past, I'm trusting (albeit with a little apprehension) that Harriet Miers will be a conservative justice.
The President may even be smiling at the uproar by conservatives, which may be serving to provide false reassurance to the liberals during her confirmation process.
Just shut up and send your check to the GOP so that Olympia Snowe can get re-elected. (somewhat sarcastic)
Well said.
Are there NO Republicans who have played team sports and understand that only through teamwork can we succeed? Makes herding cats seem constructive. Remember, pulling in a thousand different directions will usher Hitlery into the Oval Office. When this happens buy Burkha futures and kiss our (already jeopardized) Constitutional Republic Buh By! Kofi Anan will be in charge and we will forget all about Hurricane Harriet; she will be the least of our problems.
I am finding that the strongest arguments against Harriet Miers comes from the weakness of the arguments in her support. It still boils down to "Trust Bush." When it come to a lifetime Supreme Court appointment that's not good enough. Not by a long shot - especially given the sorry history of Republican nominated justices.
Republicans have won 7 of the last 10 presidential elections over the last 37 years and the best we can hope for with this nomination is STILL 5-4 splits on the issues that concern us most. That's the BEST CASE scenario, even if Bush had nominated a McConnell or a Luttig. The more I learn about Miers, especially her intellectual vacuousness and her discomfort with argumentation, the more deeply disappointed I become. Sorry, but Bush has not convinced me he is the sly and clever one on this nomination. I am NOT falling in line on this one..
Sins of the father. Sins of the son.
Souter and Souter lite.
Thanks. I just hope I'm right.
(2) Why is a female political appointee lawyer out of Bush's personal entourage nominated to the Supreme Court of the United States, ahead of say Richard Posner, Judge of the US 7th Circuit Court of Appeals for 23 years and by practically any objective measure one of the greatest legal minds of his generation? Don't tell me he is too old for the job, he is 66. And I don't care what his politics are. He is easily the most qualified man in the country.
Do we win elections to appoint unqualified men and women over more qualified ones? Do we decide the composition of the Supreme Court of the United States for the next twenty years, to appease a liberal press or a few brain dead supposedly swing vote Senators, by avoiding any discussion of actual legal issues, in favor of vapid public relations and evasion?
>>>>Despite predictions of doom and gloom -- most melodious to liberal ears -- those on the right should respect President Bush's history of outstanding judicial appointments and cut the lady some slack.
Amen.
Amen again.
Ginsburg was known and was "highly qualified" according to the ABA. Do you have a valid point yet?
Who says Miers isn't qualified? You don't have to be a judge to be on the Supreme Court. Rehnquist wasn't a judge, and neither were about 1/3 of all SC justices. It isn't a requirement. You don't even have to be a lawyer.
"Ginsburg was known and was "highly qualified" according to the ABA."
So because one liberal was qualified... we should only put up unqualified nominees. Got it. Take a logic class.
One thing is for sure: we don't win elections by letting JasonC decide who is, and who is not, qualified for the Supreme Court.
And if you didn't see the wisdom behind appointing Roberts to succeed Rehnquist, then it's no surprise you'd nominate a guy like Posner to the Supreme Court.
"Do you have a valid point yet?"
I've made lots. Since you asked though, let me give you my 2 main reasons for opposing Miers.
She:
1. Has no particular qualifications aside from being a personal friend of Bush. Neither experience nor exemplary performance/intellectual weight is in her record. As a matter of fact, commentators have noted her complete lack of any particular evidence of ideological courage (which is absolutely necessary on the Supreme Court if one is to not move left like Souter, O'connor, or Kennedy). Furthermore, the Supreme Court is not merely a 9-way voting booth. Just as important as votes are Justices that will influence the court with their insightful questions/opinions. We have no reason to expect those things from her and the Miers apologists haven't even addressed that subject.
2. Is over 60 years old. This is not a disqualifier in and of itself, but it does tell me that Bush clearly was not trying to make the choice that would have the biggest long-term impact on the Supreme Court, and I consider it a wasted opportunitiy to choose as a replacement to O'connor a justice only 14 years younger than her... particularly when there were far more qualified justices over 10 years younger than Miers.
Conservatives are to the Republican Party what the blacks, pardon, the African Americans, are to Dimocrat Party.
As long as they go along with the program and don't make waves, everything's OK. Step out of line, and WHAM.
The Big Tent has a section roped off, way in the back, just for conservatives.
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.