Posted on 10/15/2005 3:15:52 PM PDT by Jim Robinson
Did Bush promise to appoint a justice like Scalia? CNN's Bash busted an "urban myth" with a myth of her own, while Fred Barnes changed his story -- then changed it back again
For six years, political figures and interest groups on the left, right, and center, along with reporters and commentators, have noted that during his first presidential campaign, George W. Bush promised to use Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia as the model for his nominations to the court. Weekly Standard executive editor Fred Barnes was apparently the first to report this, in a July 1999 article for that magazine. For six years, Barnes and countless others repeated this fact, and neither Bush nor any of his aides seem to have ever challenged it -- in fact, Bush did not contest Al Gore's statement in a 2000 presidential debate that Bush had made such a promise. But in recent months -- when two vacancies gave Bush the opportunity to actually make nominations to the Supreme Court -- an apparent effort to walk back the promise has been under way, with Barnes himself playing a key role through a series of inconsistent statements about his own article.
Most recently, CNN White House correspondent Dana Bash narrated a segment on the October 12 edition of The Situation Room that purported to debunk the "urban myth" that, while campaigning for president, George Bush said that his Supreme Court nominees would be in the mold of Scalia. Bash claimed that the "myth" of Bush's Scalia comments was based on a November 1999 appearance on NBC's Meet the Press in which, as Bash noted, Bush praised Scalia but didn't promise to appoint a justice like him. Bash then said that during a 2000 debate, Gore, Bush's opponent, "connected the dots" -- falsely suggesting that Gore was the first to interpret Bush's Meet the Press comments as a promise to appoint a justice like Scalia. Finally, Bash provided a clue about the source of recent efforts to walk back Bush's promise by stating that "[a] longtime time Bush aide confirms to CNN Mr. Bush didn't actually publicly pledge a Scalia or a [Clarence] Thomas, but they made no effort to clarify."
Contrary to Bash's claim, Bush's Meet the Press appearance was not the original basis for the assertion that Bush promised to appoint a justice in the mold of Scalia. Under the headline "Bush Scalia," Weekly Standard executive editor Fred Barnes wrote in his magazine's July 5-12, 1999, issue:
WHO IS GEORGE W. BUSH'S IDEAL JUDGE, the model for nominees he'd pick for the Supreme Court? Antonin Scalia, that's who. In public comments, of course, Bush has declared his desire, if elected president, to choose judges who interpret the Constitution strictly, and Scalia qualifies on that count. Appointed by President Reagan in 1986, Scalia is one of the most conservative justices on the high court, and is part of the minority that favors overturning Roe v. Wade, the 1973 decision that legalized abortion. But when asked about the kind of judge he would really want, Bush was quite specific. "I have great respect for Justice Scalia," Bush said, "for the strength of his mind, the consistency of his convictions, and the judicial philosophy he defends."
Bush singled out Scalia in response to a written question I submitted to his presidential campaign. Some Bush aides thought he might cite Clarence Thomas, nominated by Bush's father, President Bush, in 1991, as the model for his judicial appointments. Every bit as conservative as Scalia, Thomas would likewise reverse Roe v. Wade. But Thomas is more controversial as a result of sexual harassment charges made against him by Anita Hill. Bush is not an admirer of his father's other nominee, David Souter, now one of the Court's leading liberals.
Barnes stood by his reporting for six years. Media Matters for America can find no example of either Barnes or any Bush aide correcting the July 1999 article through mid-2005. In fact, Barnes has repeatedly reiterated the point that Bush said he'd name a justice like Scalia -- and has done so as recently as this year...
Excerpted, read the rest here: http://mediamatters.org/items/200510130005
Bork was dead on the money, in spades, with that prediction!!!
http://www.aim.org/media_monitor/A308_0_2_0_C/sendpage/index.php
Cliff Kincaid:
But many stories from the campaign period are quite clear about what Bush said. As noted by the Associated Press, "Throughout the year, Bush tried to frame the issue in terms of philosophy, saying his ideal nominees would base their judgments strictly on the words of the Constitution. Pressed to name a justice who fits that mold, Bush pointed to Scalia and Thomas."
Bush said about Scalia: "The reason I like him so much is I got to know him here in Austin when he came down" for a visit. Bush said of him, "He's witty, he's interesting, he's firm." Asked whether he thought Thomas was "the most qualified man" Bush's father could have appointed to the high court, the former Texas governor replied, "I do." Bush said that when it came to appointments to the court, "I'll put competent judges on the bench, people who will strictly interpret the Constitution and will not use the bench to write social policy."
LOL!!!!
1. Labor Day 2000, Naperville Illinois
2. 6 Nov 2000, Green Bay Wisconsin
3. 1 October 2004, Allentown PA
4. 18 October 2004, Marlton New Jersey.
And by the way, I found the text of what he said in Allentown (url below). Here's what he said about judges there " We stand for a culture of life in which every person counts, and every being matters. (Applause.) We stand for marriage and family, which are the foundations of our society. (Applause.) We stand for the appointment of federal judges who know the difference between personal opinion and the strict interpretation of the law. (Applause.) ".
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2004/10/20041001-10.html
BS. I heard him say it CLEARLY at the rally I was at. Are you calling me a liar? I sure hope not.
It was said SO OFTEN that there are cartoons depicting a tiny HM standing in a large jello mold shaped like Scalia, for crying out loud.
The WH spin machine is out in force, I see, trying to get Dubya's fat out of the fire here.
This is his "read my lips" moment. Actually, it's 100X worse.
And we're gonna hold him to his Promise. If he continues to try to RAM HM down our throats, there WILL be hell to pay in '06 and '08 - regardless of whether that means HRC in the WH or not.
Asked whether Thomas, who likewise opposes abortion, was "the most qualified man" Bush's father could have appointed to the high court, the Texas governor replied, "I do."
I guess it depends on your definition of the term "qualified" eh?
That's cool. It's important to know who is easily led.
So... we search the archives/transcripts/press releases, etc., of speeches Bush gave to those groups.
I am no intellect on constitutional law. Just a common man.
But, the least I expect from this president is someone like Roberts. What a great nomination!
"President Bush promised in 2000 and again in 2004 that he would only nominate strict-constructionist, original-intent judges and justices in the Scalia-Thomas mold," Richard Land, president of the Southern Baptist Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission, said in reference to two of the court's most conservative justices.
So, she gets to ask that question, "what specifically in those opinions strongly suggests ..." about the nominee candidates. I wonder if the candidate as disqualified if the answer was -- crickets --.
I remember the city. Not the date. But I could probably dig it up if I had to.
I'd LOVE to have a recording from that rally, and ram it right down his..
I am disgusted with Dubya. He has turned out to be nothing more than another Politician, making empty promises. (Gee, what a surprise).
Quite simply - he said it. Both my wife and I remember him saying it. It was the biggest "applause line" of the night.
He is simply trying to get his bacon out of the fire, and it ain't workin.
Just wait until a recording turns up. I can't wait.
Jim, I wish it were so but I seem to recall Bush saying this in an event that I attended-- a rally about 5 months before the General in 2004.
You are right about needing to look ahead. We need to come up with a new, long-term plan.
What rally were you at?
I never liked Bork. I didn't have to throw him "overboard", He did that all by himself when he came out against the 2nd amendment. He's living proof that an education doesn't make someone an expert.
I think it's unfair to prejudge this woman before she has a fair hearing. The kind of vitriolic insults she has suffered in the past two weeks is disgraceful IMO.
====
Some of these thin-skinned pundits would have their panties in a wad if they were verbally abused as much as Miers has been.
I half expect her to show up at the hearing with Coulter and Kristol's teeth hanging from her charm bracelet.
In any case, I look forward to the Hearings following the Full Up or Down Vote by the Full Senate. In or Out that's ok. If we must send up another Batter, the Nuclear (Simple Majority) Option should be implemented first.
Did Bush say it at "every city" or are you back tracking to just the one you were at?
Perhaps I shouldn't have said "EVERY" rally, because I clearly wasn't at ALL of them.
But the rally I was at ABSOLUTELY, POSITIVELY had the "justices in the mold of Scalia and Thomas line". It brought down the house.
People keep talking about the Supremes as though they did all their own stuff in their own little monastic room.
Hogwash.
The only reasonable question is will she be a team player on the side that characterizes Bushes and Reagan more than the side that characterizes Clinton. She is certainly going to get wooed from both ends. I just can't see her putting up with much of Ginsburg or Breyer, however.
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.