Posted on 10/15/2005 2:37:57 AM PDT by KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle
Supreme Court confirmation battles usually involve excavations of the nominee's judicial opinions, legal briefs and decades-old government memos. Harriet Miers is the first nominee to hit trouble because of thank-you letters.
Miers's paper trail may be relatively short, but it makes plain that her climb through Texas legal circles and into George W. Bush's inner circle was aided by a penchant for cheerful personal notes. Years later, even some of her supporters are cringing -- and her opponents are viciously making merry -- at the public disclosure of this correspondence and other writings from the 1990s.
Bush may have enjoyed being told by Miers in 1997, "You are the best governor ever -- deserving of great respect." But in 2005 such fawning remarks are contributing to suspicion among Bush's conservative allies and others that she was selected more for personal loyalty than her legal heft.
Combined with columns she wrote for an in-house publication while president of the Texas Bar Association -- critics have called them clumsily worded and empty of content -- Miers may be at risk of flunking the writing portion of the Supreme Court confirmation test, according to some opponents.
"The tipping point in Washington is when you go from being a subject of caricature to the subject of laughter," said Bruce Fein, a Miers critic who served in the Reagan administration's Justice Department and who often speaks on constitutional law. "She's in danger of becoming the subject of laughter."
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
Words. Fail. Me.
And, clearly, her. Or perhaps she fails words?
Yawn...Big deal. I know people who are absolutely brilliant thinkers and yet can't write. I know a few fantastic writers who are dumber than rocks.
If you haven't already, click on the link and read the last few paragraphs of this story. It's not just her writing style that's disturbing.
Posted on October 12th, 2005 at 2:11 pm. About 'Miers: Second Runner Up?'.
Did everyone hear this on Rush?
We need rebirth of the American tradition of leadership at every level of government and in private life as well. The United States of America is unique in world history because it has a genius for leaders–many leaders–on many levels. But, back in 1976, Mr. Carter said, “Trust me.” And a lot of people did. Now, many of those people are out of work. Many have seen their savings eaten away by inflation. Many others on fixed incomes, especially the elderly, have watched helplessly as the cruel tax of inflation wasted away their purchasing power. And, today, a great many who trusted Mr. Carter wonder if we can survive the Carter policies of national defense.
“Trust me” government asks that we concentrate our hopes and dreams on one man; that we trust him to do what’s best for us. My view of government places trust not in one person or one party, but in those values that transcend persons and parties. The trust is where it belongs–in the people. The responsibility to live up to that trust is where it belongs, in their elected leaders. That kind of relationship, between the people and their elected leaders, is a special kind of compact.
Ronald Wilson Reagan
http://www.confirmthem.com/?p=1568
This is looking less and less like a Supreme Court nomination every day. It's becoming a circus. One that you feel ever more strongly that you should leave, but can't seem to find the way out.
It's very possible that some of Monica Lewinsky's notes to her Oval Office "soulmate" made more sense and were less gushing than Miers' letters to Bush. This nomination is a joke.
LOL!
"This proposed law does violence to the balance of power between the legislative and judicial branch of our State's government and constitutes an assault upon the powers of the Supreme Court" just as it had fallen into "Republican hands for the first time," Miers wrote.
Fein said it is outrageous to invoke separation-of-powers arguments when a legislature -- wisely or not -- tries to foster free enterprise. By citing the GOP's new control of the Texas Supreme Court, he said, Miers seemed to be seeking a partisan outcome on shaky constitutional grounds.
This may be one nomination where the filibuster would at least make *some* sense, but the Democrats won't use it unless they're absolutely convinced Miers is another Scalia or Thomas. If Miers comes off as a moderate at the hearings, her qualifications won't matter to Democrats. They'll vote for her because she's better than the possible alternative. It's up to Republicans to make sure this woman is up to the job.
You are exactly right. However, in the legal realm, especially at this level, a person has to be able to express their thoughts precisely and accurately in writing.
"Yawn. I know people who are absolutely brilliant thinkers and yet can't write."
With respect, you seem to suffer from a surfeit of insouciance.
Yawning at the inability of a potential Supreme Court justice to write, when writing is fundamental to the job?
LOL.
Yes, but the White House will reportedly be bringing out Miers' 93-year old kindergarten teacher to attest that Harriet was absolutely brilliant at painting inside the lines.
If she winds up receiving more support than Roberts from the Dem. side of the aisle, you can be guaranteed that the rabid, intractable pro-abortion crowd will exact a measure of revenge from recalcitrant Democratic senators.
There are two constituencies within the Democratic Party that these liberal buffoons live in constant fear of, the anti-Bush zealots and the pro-abortion, radical gender feminists.
They risk alienating at least one-and perhaps both-if they vote to confirm the blank slate that is Harriet Miers.
Unite America: Nominate Lewinsky!
Yikes! After reading your snippet I read the whole article. She wrote that in 1996 ... not that long ago!
I'm more worried about her being another o'conner on the court than her writing.
If she was a conservative that couldn't write at least she could get her clerks to do that for her.
I'd rather have a conservative that couldn't write and be another vote for scalia majority opinion than a moderate that could write.
But with O'Conner she is not a conservative and can't write either.
It just doesn't add up.
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.