My appologies to Mr. Fund. ;)
Posted on 10/14/2005 4:55:21 AM PDT by G.Mason
Los Angeles
WHITE House speechwriters first learned the name Harriet Miers in January 2001, when drafts started reappearing full of corrections, instructions and particularly annoying requests for factual substantiation. In the campaign, life had been simpler, the editing and fact-checking a little more casual. Now the old ways wouldn't do anymore because "Harriet said" this or "Harriet said" that. Who was this woman, and could the staff secretary please confine herself to secretarial duties?
We had a few things to learn about the job of the staff secretary - the person who controls all paper passing through the Oval Office - and above all about the caliber of the woman behind the editing. And now that fellow conservatives in Washington are asking variations of the same question about President Bush's nominee to the Supreme Court - Who is this "crony," "cipher," "hack," "functionary" or, as my former speechwriting colleague David Frum has called her, this "petty bureaucrat"? - I think I can help with the answer.
When you know Harriet Miers, it's funny to think of her as the subject of such controversy. Yet already her notoriety is such that even the most innocent of virtues can be thrown back at her as inadequate - "not even second-rate," as a National Review Online posting said, "but third-rate." She's a detail person. Diligent and dependable. Honest, kind, modest, devout and all that. A real mediocrity.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
Frum's petulent never ending carping against this woman makes one wonder which one is the woman in this matter.
"The last shall be first, and the first shall be last..."
"Blessed are the meek.."
Well, of course that's just a religious analogy, and I am certain some will come along to knock it down. I do, however, look foward to hearing from her at the hearings.
And there are some really subtle slams to Frum and Kristol in this article. I was glad to read this just for those comments! (Probably not very Christian of me, but I have been sorely tried the last 10 days.)
I want someone like this on the court. I'm sick and tired of the typical Beltway BS.
Read the damn article. It's not "Someone from the N. Y. Times." It's a former Bush staff member, obviously a conservative, who unlike you and the other bandwagon harpies, worked with Miers and knows exactly what and who she is.
No doubt.
Well, here's another irony, along the lines of what you said.
Here's Bill Clinton, Rhodes Scholar, a supposed list of accomplishments and endorsements a yard long. What'd we say? "You idiots -- character matters!"
Then here's Harriet Miers. Not a long list of FLASHY accomplishments, endorsements mixed with denunciations. But an almost universally, overwhelmingly attested golden character.
And what are a bunch of FReepers saying?
"Character doesn't count!"
Dan
BTTT
Scully's part of the Bush offensive -- no pun intended.
http://www.matthewscully.com/matthew.htm
Matthew Scully served until August 2004 as special assistant to the president and deputy director of presidential speechwriting. He worked for President George W. Bush a total of five years, including 18 months in the 2000 campaign, and was part of the team that drafted the President’s post-September 11th addresses and every major speech of the first term. http://www.matthewscully.com/matthew.htm
>My office cleaning lady is also hard working and compassionate. Thank God she doesn't work at the White House or she'd be a Supreme Court nominee.<
Bet that the fact she is the cleaning lady is the only thing you know about her.
My appologies to Mr. Fund. ;)
Strange, after the fact, event.
We don't need another testimonial from a friend. This really isn't about Harriet Miers the person. The question is whether she is the best and most qualified person for the job. For those of us who oppose her nomination, she isn't.
Check your freepmail.
On another thread I asked what are the qualifications for supreme court are, where they are written down, and who decided what they were?
From the responses I got, I found out that there arent any and they're not written down anywhere?
I guess the president decides and the senate can agree or disagree.
You make a good point. I wish that the conservative nay-sayers would at least wait until confirmation hearings before jumping to judgement.
Of course we do. Obviously you don't and it is fortunate for the rest of us that you do not control our First Amendment rights.
"This really isn't about Harriet Miers the person."
Again you miss the point of this exercise.
" The question is whether she is the best and most qualified person for the job."
Unfortunalely for you and those that think like you do, the Constitution establishes who shall have the power to nominate Justices for the Supreme Court. The President decides whom he believes to be the "most qualified" person. Period. No ifs ands or buts about it. End of story.
" For those of us who oppose her nomination, she isn't."
For those of you who oppose her nomination, you have my deepest and sincerest sympathies.
kabar, I tend to agree with rll...but who would you say would be the ideal nominee, and why?
rll...please link me to previous thread with responses re: qualifications...
G.Mason, thanks for posting this article! I'm e-mailing it to my spouse...I thought it provided some much-needed insight, but of course that's JMHO!
I am not preventing anyone from expressing their views nor am I advocating that. You are taking "need" too literally. I just found a former WH speech writer's endorsement less than convincing when it comes to Miers' credentials and abilities to be a SCOTUS justice. IMO it doesn't help Miers regardless of whether you are for or against her.
Again you miss the point of this exercise.
Again, you miss my point. I don't consider the opinions of Ms. Miers' personal characteristics to be of primary importance. I believe there are more experienced and qualified conservative personnel out there who have a proven track record in judicial affairs and don't require any speculation on where they stand.
Unfortunately for you and those that think like you do, the Constitution establishes who shall have the power to nominate Justices for the Supreme Court. The President decides whom he believes to be the "most qualified" person. Period. No ifs ands or buts about it. End of story.
I understand the Constitution probably better than you do. We live in a democratic republic, not a monarchy. I can express my opinion on what the President does as much as you can. The President is not infalible. I believe he is wrong.
As a registered Republican and contributor to the GOP, Ken Mehlman sent me an email requesting my support for the Miers' nomination (similar to the request he sent for the Robverts' nomination). He stated, "To ensure Ms. Miers is confirmed by the U.S. Senate, I need you to do three things.
1. Call your Senators. Tell them Harriet Miers has your support and deserves theirs.
2. Sign our petition in support of the timely confirmation of Harriet Miers.
3. Call talk radio, write a letter to the editor of your local paper and tell your friends and neighbors why you support the President's choice.
I responded that I could not support the Miers' nomination and explained why. I had already supported Roberts as requested by Mehlman. End of story.
The Senate must confirm the Miers' nomination. It will be interesting to see how many GOP senators will support her. Coburn, Brownback, and Allen have been non-committal.
For those of you who oppose her nomination, you have my deepest and sincerest sympathies.
I find it interesting that the Miers' supporters must resort to ad hominen attacks and the "my way or the highway" approach whenever those of us who consider ourselves loyal Republicans and conservatives express disagreement with the President on an issue. It is like we committed heresy. Did you support the President signing McCain-Feingold?
Ideal? I would have preferred Luttig or McDonnell. They have a proven judicial record and an originalist judicial philosophy.
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.