Posted on 10/10/2005 12:33:51 PM PDT by Crackingham
Question: What does Harriet E. Miers, a highly successful lawyer, longtime member of Valley View Christian Church in Dallas and confidant of the president of the United States, want more than anything else?
Answer: The approval of the faculty of Yale Law School.
Or at least that is the fear among conservatives. They worry that although Miers is believed to be a pro-life evangelical conservative, she -- like David Souter and Anthony Kennedy before her -- will be seduced by liberalism. As former Bush speechwriter David Frum noted after Miers was nominated, "The pressures on a Supreme Court justice to shift leftward are intense." Frum noted "the sweet little inducements -- the flattery, the invitations to conferences in Austria and Italy, the lectureships at Yale and Harvard -- that come to judges who soften and crumble."
Ah, yes, the sweet little inducements: Washington dinner parties, laudatory editorials from the nation's great liberal newspapers and, perhaps most important, praise from the smug savants back at dear old Yale or Harvard. Many leading lawyers never forget their roots in the Ivy League, where all-knowing professors throw laurels on judges who "get it" and scorn those who don't. Forget Austria: It takes a very strong (or very principled) constitution to do without that intellectual flattery.
But perhaps that makes Miers the perfect candidate. Perhaps it takes someone who did not go to Harvard or Yale and has never seemed to care. Miers went to law school at Southern Methodist University, which, although a well-respected institution, was unlikely to have been a bastion of progressive thought when she entered the law school in 1970.
As a result, she likely avoided the flaying of conservative justices that would have been tattooed in the minds of most members of today's Supreme Court.
(Excerpt) Read more at pittsburghlive.com ...
Yes, the Howlin Rule of Proper Internet Etiquette.
Call me crazy, but she doesn't strike me as one to scrupulously adhere to the standards established by Emily Post or the Marquis de Queensbury.
Well, that's between you and her. I prefer to form my opinions one at a time, and Howlin's been very nice to me over the years I've known her.
After watching what they've done to Harriet Miers, who in their right mind with accept the offer?
Well, that's between you and her. I prefer to form my opinions one at a time, and Howlin's been very nice to me over the years I've known her.
(Quizzical Smiley.)
Ann Coulter really debased herself the other day. What was that she said? When Bush was "boozing it up"? Thought we had Paul Begala on the line....
I wouldn't know.
However, if we were to go by the manner in which she conducts herself here, I can only say that her bedside manner in real life would probably make Nurse Ratched cringe.
Brit Hume says Kristol and Buchannan are conservative icons......when did that happen? After watching and listening to Ann morph into a Bush bashing shrew, I'm befuddled beyond confused. :-(
By nominating a stealth conservative to avoid having the debate, Bush has basically said to outspoken conservatives . . . if you want to be nominated to a high court position, you better cool it.
Bush did not do this intentionally, of course. But it is the implied message: To all conservatives who publicize and debate their views in public, we give you our moral support. But when the rewards are handed out, you will be passed over for others who kept their opinions secret.
I'd guess that somebody forgot to consult her before nominating. She was OTR about Roberts, too. Still is.
Get 51 non-RINOs in the Senate, and you'll see more glasnost from a conservative president.
Hard for me to say. I'm a pretty nasty one, myself.
:-)
And, he'd still be a better pick than Miers!
you are absolutely cracking me up today....
HUH??? Miers hooked her star with President Bush in 1989. Around the same time she was born again and became a Republican. The girl's got timing.
I've got to agree with CL on the issue of citing a FReeper in a post without welcoming said FReeper into the ongoing discussion. I'm not trying to hijack here, but I have seen a lot of this going on lately and it p!sses me off to no end. At best, it's lazy; worst, cowardly. Usually, it is a lazy coward. Yeesh! I need a nice cold beer.
I honestly have no problem with telling others what I think of them, regardless of how critical my opinion might be.
If I had any hesistation whatsoever in expressing my honest opinion I'm certain that I would have a lot more FRiends on this forum.
But if what I did really was that tactless, then I apologize.
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.