President Bush has blundered badly with the nomination of Harriet Miers. (Udated)

October 16, 2005 | Westpole

[Westpole]

President Bush has blundered badly with the nomination of Harriet Miers. It isn't just the profound split within the Republican Party that is damaging. The presidency itself is weakened because his judgment is now doubted within his own camp.

The Democrats always doubted his judgment, indeed his intellect. Now the same doubts are being expressed on the right. What is it about this nomination that can so undermine the presidency? The main problem with Ms. Miers nomination can be summed up simply - she is a "weak sister".

People respect bold action even when they don't agree with it. The Democrats mostly voted for the war in Iraq even though they opposed it. A bold move by a President will usually be deferred to. But there is nothing bold in this nomination. The very character of the nominee that is emerging is that of a follower not a leader.

Some may believe the strength of the opposition to Miers comes from people with misgivings about her views on Roe or her clandestine leanings on any number of other issues. But that is not what is giving the Bush presidency problems. Mr. Bush could have gone in one of two other directions;

If he nominated a conservative intellectual leader the right would have cheered and the left would have played the same cards they have over other conservative judicial nominees. Their opposition would only have made the President look stronger not weaker. Had Mr. Bush nominated say a leader with centrists or even liberal views the right may have objected but he could claim that "balance" on the court is a an important principal for American stability and his willings to put stability over his party's wishes would have made him look bold and certainly in the media wise. In either case the president would be a bold thoughtful leader but Mr. Bush did neither. He nominated a camp follower, a weak sister whose best quality is her loyalty to him. If confirmed the Democrats would hope the loyalty was binding as long as it was convenient. Whereas the right would hope she would just follow Justices Scalia and Thomas. So what Mr. Bush has done is force both sides to wonder which leader this follower will follow. No one is comfortable with making that speculation for a justice of the Supreme Court. And everyone senses a missed opportunity to increase the intellectual heft of decision making in the country's only forum for which there is no appeal.

[Earthdweller]

Write your Senator..

[rock58seg]

Hang in there! It's better to have this intraparty squabble now than later. It is certainly better than just staying on the plantation as certain Dem factions do. I have been a Conservative since Ike. Given his Northeastern RINO congress, I could well understand his staying out and playing golf.

We may not prevail on this, but, a "shot across the bow" is always an attention getter, that advises your displeasure.

Had it not been for Iraq and SCOTUS, I might well have voted for Kerry. I am sure the Gop side of the aisle would have been more "responsible" as opposition to Kerry policies. Similar to the 90's congresses and Clinton.

[inquest]

Thanks for the advice. That would be a good supplement to putting pressure on the President as well.

[SteveH]

Your reasoning is what isn't reasoning at all-- it's ridiculous.

Except for a change of object, it's not my reasoning at all. But thanks for agreeing with my point, which was that the form of the statement was not reasoning at all.

The name is M-I-E-R-S. If you're going to criticize someone, spell her name correctly.

Form over substance. Whatever.

The fact that she hasn't withdrawn her name says that she's not a quitter.

That in itself is OK, but by not quitting now, she's dragging the country down with her, which is quite a different thing.

Skimpy paper qualifications. History of alignment with liberal agenda and/or rhetoric in the past. The nomination of Harriet Miers has the hallmarks of an 'affirmative action' nomination.

Harriet Meirs, affirmative action nominee to the Supreme Court-- withdraw your nomination. Now.

[jdhljc169]

"I think anytime a conservative, prolife person, can get on the bench, we should support it, not gripe about which school she went to."

Being pro-life does not equate to overturning ROE!!!!

(I am pro-life, just so you know)

[SteveH]

Over the last 4yrs-9mths, Bush has nominated to the federal courts jurists like Janice Rogers Brown, Pricilla Owens, Edith Clement, John Roberts and others. I can't for the life of me understand why so many, so-called conservatives aren't willing to give Bush and Miers the benefit of the doubt. Keep your powder dry and wait to see how Miers handles the Senate hearings. Jumping to conclusions solves nothing.

There really is nothing Miers can do at the hearing that compensates for her lack of a clear strict constructionist record. It is not enough to claim that one is a strict constructionist. One must have proof. That's the problem. There is no proof-- if there was proof, it would be evident all over FR and the rest of the Internet well before now, if it wasn't already released by the WH to save us all this debate. Read inquest's recent postings. The conclusion is that Miers is a career lawyer and otherwise undistinguished as a strict constructionist in constitutional law. I have no doubt she is a fine corporate lawyer. That's not what I voted for in the 2004 presidential election. I voted for someone who promised strict constructionist appointees to the judiciary, and most importantly, to the Supreme Court. It's black and white, and Miers fails the test very miserably. She can say anything she want and she will probably be good at saying nothing of substance at the hearings, since that is the safest bet to gaining Senate approval. That would leave her free to do the crab dance, scuttling left once she is sitting on the bench. I don't want that, and I am just voicing my opinion. There's nothing juvenile about it, it's my perogative as a citizen and as a guest at FR. If you or anyone else can't handle it, that's not my problem.

The Miers nomination has the hallmarks of an affirmative action nomination. Wake up! She helped found a women's studies program at SMU, for crying out loud! No sale here.

Harriet Miers-- withdraw your nomination. NOW!!!

[USPatriette]

"The meanness and vitriol spewed out by the anti Miers punditry has harmed them permanently. President Bush and Harriet Miers still have their integrity."

I could not agree with this more.

I still haven't made up my mind about Miers (who could with all the shouting?), but I do know my eyes have been opened.

[Clara Lou]

You used the "object," and it was ridiculous.
You lose gravitas when you can't even spell the 5-letter name of the person you're criticizing.
but by not quitting now, she's dragging the country down with her
That is an alarmist, baseless comment, just as ridiculous as your "Barney" example. [Believe it or not, I'm not particularly pro-Miers. I'm willing to wait for her hearings. She may indeed be a bad nominee. I just think the anti-Miers legions are making themselves-- and conservatives -- look foolish with their alarmist screeching and calling for her to withdraw her nomination.]

[Clara Lou]

She helped found a women's studies program at SMU, for crying out loud!
So, all women's studies ever established are evil? How do you know what the substance of the studies was when she founded them and while she supervised them? Give me a link, if you have one. I don't care for femi-nazis. However, believe it or not, women did find themselves on the short end of "the stick" for centuries.

[rock58seg]

Write your Senator with your complaints

"Kay baby" and Cornyn and Earthdweller. Just many ways to say "Bushbots"?

I might just as well write my Dem congresscritter, Henry Cuellar, who is still trying to convince me there is a SoSec lockbox, with actual money in it. It's a good thing the bankruptcy laws were tightened, those Iou's are really worth something now.

Had I known The President would start not vigorously pursuing the War On Terror, make weak SCOTUS appointments, I could have voted for Kerry and hope, that keeping the goverment out of one party hands would negate some of the excesses we are seeing.

Now I have to worry that not only will we see a Hillary Presidency, but we will lose the congress also.

[SteveH]

You used the "object," and it was ridiculous.

It is evident you missed my point entirely, even when I politely spelled it out by typing very slowly and clearly. Therefore I withdraw from discussing this further with you. I do congratulate you on correcting my occasional spelling errors of proper nouns. You appear to have a prediliction for suspending disbelief at a time when there really is no persuasive reason for waiting-- the scanty public record is already in, Miers' future is predictable by her past, and the hearing is no more than a dog and pony act (whatever way it turns out). Admit this-- or good luck to you.

Harriet Miers-- withdraw your nomination. NOW!!

"More and more, the intractable problems in our society have one answer: broad-based intolerance of unacceptable conditions and a commitment by many to fix problems."

-Harriet Miers

[Reagan Man]

>>>>Read inquest's recent postings.

I have. He's as stupid as they come. if you agree with him then you're just as .......

[SteveH]

So, all women's studies ever established are evil? How do you know what the substance of the studies was when she founded them and while she supervised them? Give me a link, if you have one. I don't care for femi-nazis. However, believe it or not, women did find themselves on the short end of "the stick" for centuries.

???

Click on "Miers" keyword to do your own homework on her.

As for problems with women's studies program at universities, whoa, it sounds at a minimum as if it's been a while since you've been at a university... I think you might want to be a little more perceptive about what actually goes on at a university with regard to these "programs." Are you in favor of reparations for females by any chance, or attended the Wiccan Burning Man celebration this year?

Go in peace. Sheesh ;-)

Harriet Miers-- withdraw your nomination NOW!!

[Plutarch]

CJ Rehnquist wasn't a judge either when Nixon nominated him to the SCOTUS.

Reinquist was (1) Widely respected for his intellect, (2) A US Attorney. (3) had graduated No. 2 in his class from Stanford law school. (4) was young.

None of these describe Miers.

[badgerlandjim]

Nobody supervises a POTUS. Nobody!

Oh yeah? Hillary did!

[SteveH]

I have. He's as stupid as they come. if you agree with him then you're just as .......

I'm sorry, but I'll refrain from trading insults. Go in peace.

[Treader]

lol...

[rock58seg]

>>>>Read inquest's recent postings.
I have. He's as stupid as they come. if you agree with him then you're just as ...

Welcome to the club. You are now the third person that RM doesn't agree with that he wishes to imply stupidity too. he's giving us his best shot. When your position is untenable name calling, loudly is a sure argument winner.

[Clara Lou]

As for problems with women's studies program at universities, whoa, it sounds at a minimum as if it's been a while since you've been at a university... I think you might want to be a little more perceptive about what actually goes on at a university with regard to these "programs."
[I'm working on a master's degree at a conservative-- though not completely uncontaminated by liberals-- university right now. I have been for two years.] When did Miers create this women's study? [Since you brought it up, you need to document.] What was the nature of the program as she created it?
Are you in favor of reparations for females by any chance,
You clearly did not read my post, or you would have read my "I don't like feminazis" comment. Does it sound like I'm for reparations??? If so, document.
or attended the Wiccan Burning Man celebration this year?
Your posts can certainly be wild-eyed. Peace to you, as well.