[Stellar Dendrite]

ping

[dead]

What a jerk I turned out to be for not loving the Miers nomination!

[trubluolyguy]

Perhaps people haven't looked at her accomplishments because this White House has been completely inept at promoting them. We have heard about her work in cleaning up the Texas Lottery Commission, her status as the first woman to lead the Texas Bar Association, and her leadership as the managing partner of a large Texas law firm. Given that conservatives generally don't trust trial lawyers and the Bar Association and are at best ambivalent to government sponsorship of gambling, those sound rather weak as arguments for a nomination to the Supreme Court. If Miers has other accomplishments that indicate why conservatives should trust Bush in her nomination, we've yet to hear that from the White House.

---

BINGO! Don't ask me why I don't support her. Tell me why I should.

[Stellar Dendrite]

ping

[EagleUSA]

It's enough to start making me think that we need to send a clearer message to George Bush. The White House needs to rethink its relationship to reality and its so-far loyal supporters.
-----
A-M-E-N.

[jwalsh07]

More of the same garbage. She answers a question posed to her that is is possible that soem do oppose her because of she is a woman. Of course it is possible, it is even likely and it has nothing to do with anything.

But don't let me stop you from feeling aggrieved.

[A CA Guy]

Given the chance to lay out a positive, substantial case for her nomination to the Supreme Court, the Bush administration has remained largely silent.

In my opinion, this should come with an idiot alert. Will the press and Democrats take what the President says FOR this nominee or against her?

He made the statements regarding her judicial philosophy and about how he knows her and for conservatives, that should be enough.

Bush in his brilliance IMO also put someone out there that wouldn't get a 100 million dollars in donations to use against Republicans in two election cycles coming up.
IMO Bush out thought most even here and nominated a person we need, not the one we wanted, but the choice gave Democrats far less ability to raise fund raising dollars against Republicans as I see it.

Seems IMO that Bush was brilliant.

PS, this would NOT be breaking news, but should be under bloggers, right?

[TheForceOfOne]

However, given an opportunity to smear the base that elected them
Oh horsesh%^t, I can't wait for the hearings to get this over with.

[Southack]

"Perhaps people haven't looked at her accomplishments because this White House has been completely inept at promoting them. We have heard about her work in cleaning up the Texas Lottery Commission, her status as the first woman to lead the Texas Bar Association, and her leadership as the managing partner of a large Texas law firm. ... If Miers has other accomplishments that indicate why conservatives should trust Bush in her nomination, we've yet to hear that from the White House."

While that's a fair point to make, we hardly live in a world that demands to be served by news from one source (e.g. the White House).

CQ, with little effort on their own part, could easily research to find that Miers picked Judges Janice Rogers Brown, Bill Pryor, Owen, and other staunch right-wingers for the federal bench. She led the President's research committee for those judicial openings.

If you are happy with her selections for the federal bench, then perhaps you should show some minute respect for the person who wanted them there.

[Dont_Tread_On_Me_888]

The Bush family keeps slipping in their own BS.

First, George Bush pulls the most outrageous stunt in decades of Republican't politics by naming an unqualified crony to--of all places--the Supreme Court! (even after he promised a Scalia or Thomas).

Then, Laura Bush tries to pull a Jesse Jackass by screaming "sexism".

Outrage after blunder after playing the "sexism card". Where will it stop? Why have the Bush's shifted the gear into reverse and floored the accelerator?

[mc6809e]

Perhaps people haven't looked at her accomplishments because this White House has been completely inept at promoting them. We have heard about her work in cleaning up the Texas Lottery Commission, her status as the first woman to lead the Texas Bar Association, and her leadership as the managing partner of a large Texas law firm.

These are the qualities of a good chief executive,

but not a judge.

[Cautor]

NRO comment on the sexist charge:

Okay, we confess. We don't like Harriet Miers because she's a woman. We also don't like Condi Rice because she's a woman. We don't like Margaret Thatcher because she's a woman. We don't like K-Lo because she's a woman. We don't like Mary Ann Glendon because she's a woman. We don't like Michelle Malkin because she's a woman. We don't like Lucianne Goldberg because she's a woman. We don't like Noemie Emery because she's a woman. We don't like Gertrude Himmelfarb because she's a woman. We don't like Limor Livnat because she's a woman. We don't like Linda Chavez because she's a woman. We don't like Midge Decter (had to slip that one in there) because she's a woman. We don't like Jane Austen because she was a woman. We don't like George Eliot because she was a woman. We don't like Sarah, Rachel, Rebecca and Leah because they were women....

[massadvj]

There has been a disconcerting animosity for the hard right in this administration, just as there was in his father's. It is what separates the country club, Rockerfeller wing of the party from the rest of us. They think we are a bunch of racist, sexist yahoos who can't possibly understand the complicated issues the way they do.

We gave them open borders. We gave them medicare prescription drugs. We gave them campaign finance reform. We even conceded the need for 25,000 federal agents crawling up our backsides every day in the airports of America.

The only thing we asked for, and the one thing that was promised us, was a strict constructionist court. We never waivered in our support for this president. Now that he is a lame duck, the wife feels free to call us "sexists". Go figure.

[untrained skeptic]

The First Lady was asked if sexism were a possible reason for some of the people objecting to Miers, and she said that it was a possibility.

That doesn't mean that she thinks all people objecting to her nomination are sexist.

Whiny conservatives that keep looking for insults where none were meant are no better than whiny liberals that do the same.

[Cautor]

Regarding the TV interview of the President and Mrs. Bush this morning, I found the following comment of interest:

Q A lot of criticism coming for your nominee to the Supreme Court, Harriet Miers, from conservatives - people like Trent Lott and Pat Buchanan and George Will and Bill Kristol. Were you taken off-guard a little bit, caught by surprise by the amount of criticism you're getting for Judge Miers?

THE PRESIDENT: Well, you know, I made a decision to put somebody on the Court who hadn't been a part of what they call the judicial monastery. In other words -- I listened, by the way, to people in the Senate who suggested, why don't you get somebody from the outside. And I figured that people are going to kind of question whether or not it made sense to bring somebody from outside the Court.

What did Bush mean by wanting to put someone on the Court "who hadn't been a part of what they call the judicial monastery."

Was Roberts part of the judicial monastery? Is Bush speaking in tongues?

[XJarhead]

The Captain is scuttling his own ship. Maybe if he's lucky, the S.S. Hilary will pick him up on the way to the Presidency.

[sauropod]

mark

[Spiff]

Instead, we get attacked for our supposed "sexism", which does more to marginalize conservatives than anything the Democrats have done over the past twenty years -- and it's so demonstrably false that one wonders if the President has decided to torch his party out of a fit of pique. After all, it wasn't our decision to treat the O'Connor seat as a quota fulfillment; that seems to have originated with the First Lady herself, a form of sexism all its own. Besides, conservatives stood ready to enthusiastically support a number of women for this nomination:

Besides, what about all of the conservative women who oppose this nomination? Are they sexist too?

[sono]

This is the flaw of W's White House - its relative inscrutability. If Reagan was The Great Communicator, W is the Non-Communicator.

[DTogo]

Perhaps people haven't looked at her accomplishments because this White House has been completely inept at promoting them.

The same could be said for the accomplishments of our brave defenders in Iraq, who have accomplished so much yet have an Administration inept at promoting those accomplishments. Or concerned citizens who want to protect our borders, yet get chided as "Vigilantes."