Posted on 10/15/2005 11:22:42 AM PDT by gobucks
By the time Senate hearings start in late October or early November, Miers will have completed a crash course in constitutional law.
White House officials and others who are familiar with her preparations said she'd paid little attention to the furor over her nomination while concentrating on the task at hand. They dismissed speculation that she might heed calls from some conservatives for her withdrawal.
Supporters expressed confidence that Miers' appearance before the Senate Judiciary Committee will quiet critics who question her qualifications for the nation's highest court. But they acknowledged that any embarrassing mistakes by the nominee could doom her chances.
"One thing that characterizes Harriet is that she is extremely diligent. She's going to be prepared," said Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, a committee member. "The temptation will be great for some to try to match wits with her on constitutional issues. There's some danger that senators might demonstrate not her lack of knowledge, but their own."
snip
Although Miers is still in the early stages of her preparation, plans call for her to participate in question-and-answer sessions with top constitutional lawyers after she digests the briefing books. Those informal sessions will evolve into more formal "murder boards," relentless grillings that more closely resemble confirmation hearings.
Roberts wasn't videotaped during his practice sessions, but Miers might be. Some White House officials worry that her quiet, low-key approach may need to be pumped up for television.
Snip
"A good performance by her in the hearings will seal the deal," said Washington lawyer Christopher Bartolomucci, another participant in Roberts' preparation.
By all accounts, Miers is well aware of the stakes.
"She knows the hearings are an important part of the process," White House spokeswoman Dana Perino said. "She'll be ready."
(Excerpt) Read more at mercurynews.com ...
With a little help from GWB's and Meirs' allies, such as Arlen Specter:
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/09/politics/politicsspecial1/09confirm.html?ei=5094&en=bcd785a5d2c24e9a&hp=&ex=1128830400&partner=homepage&pagewanted=print
"She needs more than murder boards," Mr. Specter, Republican of Pennsylvania, said in an interview, referring to the mock question-and-answer sessions most nominees use to prepare for their confirmation hearings. "She needs a crash course in constitutional law."
Harriet Meirs-- withdraw your nomination now.
It's amusing to see all the antiMiersbots wail and gnash their teeth.
Try this:
Armstrong Williams:
I say easy target because I was around during Thomas' 1991 confirmation hearings. I remember that black Americans overwhelmingly supported his nomination. I was told about the focus group meetings during which Democrats discovered that they could discredit Thomas by labeling him unqualified and focusing on his marriage to a white woman. After that, every time a Democrat appeared on television, references to Thomas' wife and charges that Thomas was unqualified resulted. The Democrats tapped into a latent river of racism, and it worked. Everyone was suddenly willing to believe that this black man was some sort of pitiful mental defective. ....
And try this:
Soon-to-be Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., said Sunday that he could support Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia if President Bush nominates him to head the high court, but he bristled at the prospect that Bush could tap Scalia's colleague Clarence Thomas, calling him "an embarrassment."
But the top Senate Democrat turned insulting when it came to the prospect that Bush might tap the court's lone black justice, Clarence Thomas, for the top spot. "I think that he has been an embarrassment to the Supreme Court," the white Nevadan said, before deriding Thomas' intellect. "I think that his opinions are poorly written. I don't - I just don't think that he's done a good job as a Supreme Court justice."
Same garbage happening here and now.
Please see Arlen Specter's comments to the NYT in response #21.
Now where did I put my "Constitutional Law for Dummies"?
Well with the hysteria from the antiMiersbots, she'll probably need a rape and slash board too.
"Great - a cram course in how to say absolutely nothing."
If her past writings in the Texas Bar newsletter are any indication, she already knows how to do that.
Well with the hysteria from the antiMiersbots, she'll probably need a rape and slash board too. Figuratively speaking.
It's a newsletter. It's not legal briefs.
I don't think she is reading this right now.
You can reach her at ...
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20500
Or if you would rather email your comment try ...
president@whitehouse.gov
Disgrace before knowledge.
Gee, I can imagine what your take on disgrace after knowledge is.
Say, Clinton impeachment or the like?
Same garbage happening here and now.
Yes. My point exactly.
So are you saying they should just be ignored?
Just like any evidence or statements that come that shed a negative light on her.
By the time Senate hearings start in late October or early November, Miers will have completed a "crash course in constitutional law."
So, when were intelligence and knowledge interchangeable?
Sghe may be very intelligent but needs to become more knowledgable.
Einstein was intelligent but not a constitutional expert.
It's possible she would eat Roberts' lunch in a corporate law confrontation.
Most certainly.
He also offers one on political punditry, but there is a few months wait because of class overload.
To have the constitutional knowledge Arlen would appreciate she would need a crash- a car crash without a helmet.
I wouldn't have believed any Freeper would cite "Scottish Law" Arlen on constitutional law if I hadn't seen it myself.
Is it just me? I really like Justice Thomas' writings.
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.