The Miers Testimony (WSJ/James Taranto)

Wall Street Journal ^ | 10-13-2005 | James Taranto

[Stellar Dendrite]

President Bush last week expressed his confidence in the constancy of Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers, saying that "20 years from now she'll be the same person, with the same philosophy," as she is today. White House aides making the case for Miers, meanwhile, have been insisting that she is a reliable conservative. Since she has no judicial record and has had little to say about constitutional law, we can only guess at what her judicial philosophy might be, if indeed she has one at all. But if she is a political conservative, then she has not remained constant over the past 20 years.

We base this on a look at her testimony in Williams v. Dallas, a voting-rights case from 1989, when Miers was an at-large member of the Dallas City Council. Read over it and the impression that emerges is of a left-leaning centrist, not a conservative. (The testimony is here, as a five-megabyte PDF file, but we're not 100% confident that our server will be able to handle it. If it disappears, check back here for a new link as soon as we're able to provide one.)

[oblomov]

Not only a Nazi name....Noontide press (referred to in his tagline) is a Willis Carto affiliated Neo-Nazi/Holocaust revisionist publisher.

[Dane]

Reagan was Reagan.

And Reagan was also a union President, but that didn't stop him from shutting down PATCo(the air traffic controllers).

[Parmenio]

And Reagan was also a union President, but that didn't stop him from shutting down PATCo...

So Harriet Miers who argued in favor of affirmative action as a Dallas Council member and just recently as a White House staffer, is going to rule against it as a judge? Doesn't make sense to me.

[auboy]

Good catch!

Conservatives may vehemently disagree on the Miers nomination, but we'll stick together when someone makes statements and has a tagline like Eich_Man's.

[MarcusTulliusCicero]

Sigh....if you try to use thought or logic, you'll never make it as a Bushbot. You just have to keep repeating to yourself over and over again "I trust the President. Having doubts is disloyal. Just ignore what's in front of your face and trust." If you say it often enough all the blood drains from your brain and it all starts to make perfect sense.

[GoCats880]

Big differences between Reagan's conversion and (possibly) Miers':

1. Reagan faced the voters every four years.
2. Reagan was very public with his conservative politics.

[governsleastgovernsbest]

Here's the message I sent Taranto in response to this column:

---

Dear BOTW:

Even more damning than the substance of the wobbly opinions expressed by Miers as documented in today's BOTW is their form. So poor is her written and oral expression that they would have to improve significantly to be considered mediocre, to wit:

"the lack of pay was a disadvantage to the ability of people to serve." - She presumably meant "disincentive."

"I have supported the maternal nurse care that was eliminated, be restored." Awkward and poorly constructed.

"The day-care money that was deleted I have asked be restored because they principally benefit women and minorities in my view." Singular "money," plural "they."

"The construction of housing that was large in number, close together, close to the street where there wasn't a place for children to play or really just seemed so compact that it didn't seem like it was planned properly to provide the kind of environment where people could really exist and have much of an existence." - Housing that was "large in number"? Also: error in parallel construction, redundant, etc.

As I'm sure you know, in his NY Times column today David Brooks exposed other examples of Miers' painfully incompetent writing.

Elitism charges be damned, I'll say it: Harriet Miers manifestly lacks the intellectual ability necessary to be a Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States.

Sincerely,

[Don'tMessWithTexas]

Reagan came out and boldly proclaimed his conversion, skewering big government, social security, medicare and US foreign policy. When did Harriet ever make any public statement in support of any controversial conservative position?

[Stellar Dendrite]

lol!

[Do not dub me shapka broham]

Her description of her own positions on the City Council suggests that she was far less conservative than the White House would have its supporters on the right believe. She endorsed such fashionable liberal causes of the 1980s as divestment from South Africa (page 47) and the activities of a "Homeless Task Force" (page 49). She also recounts her efforts on behalf of welfare spending (page 49):

I have strongly advocated the restoration of the $200,000 dental program as a model program in terms of public partnership. I have supported the maternal nurse care that was eliminated, be restored. The day-care money that was deleted I have asked be restored because they principally benefit women and minorities in my view.

On the other hand, she says she opposed the formation of a "Police Review Board," even though according to the questioning lawyer it "was supported by at least a majority of the voters in the African-American community," because, she says, "I do intend to vote based on the best interests of the entire community" (page 48).

[oblomov]

Yes, absolutely... Conservatives still agree on basic principles, and we MUST stick together despite our occasional disagreements.

[Theophilus]

Harriet Miers who argued in favor of affirmative action as a Dallas Council member

got a link?

[Revolting cat!]

There was once Harriet lawyerette,
Who by sixty would not marry yet,
She sucked up to royalty,
Who did reward her loyalty,
Appointing suffragette to join the SC octet!

[Theophilus]

Harriet Miers manifestly lacks the intellectual ability necessary to be a Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States.

If the quotes in your post are truly hers, then I'm starting to be swayed.

[adam_az]

" got a link?"

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1502009/posts

[governsleastgovernsbest]

If the quotes in your post are truly hers, then I'm starting to be swayed.

They are indeed. They are verbatim out of the Taranto column posted on this thread.

[oblomov]

Given her poor grammar, poorly constructed arguments, and her potential for "growth" evident in the documents Taranto cites, we can count on the MSM to come to her defense any moment now.

[CharlesWayneCT]

Because it is 2005, not 1989, and she says she's a conservative, and those who know her say so, and there is no evidence that she IS NOW A CONSERVATIVE.

You know, at one time she was a baby, and couldn't even feed herself or talk. Why would we want someone like THAT on the court?

[CharlesWayneCT]

The NAACP wasn't the same in 1989 as it is today.

Was Thomas ever a member of the NAACP?

[governsleastgovernsbest]

I donned my flame-retardant suit after posting my letter to Taranto on this thread, but have been pleasantly surprised by the two responses to it so far!

I have to wonder if the people responsible for vetting Miers ever read this stuff. How could they possibly not have realized what an embarrassment it would be?