Bye-bye, Harriet.
-Dan
Posted on 10/22/2005 12:29:10 AM PDT by Ol' Sparky
Miers supported affirmative action: paper
Sat Oct 22, 2005 1:46 AM ET167
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers supported affirmative action goals in the early 1990s when she served as president of the State Bar of Texas, the Washington Post reported on Saturday.
Miers wrote that "our legal community must reflect our population as a whole," and under her leadership the lawyers' association supported racial and gender set-asides and numerical targets for jobs, the newspaper reported.
With Miers' nomination already under attack from conservatives who have questioned her suitability for the high court, the Post said the nominee's stance on affirmative action could give opponents new ammunition in their drive to force her to withdraw.
The newspaper quoted a White House spokesman as saying Miers' record as president of the Texas bar does not demonstrate how she would vote on affirmative action questions involving government hiring that are before the Supreme Court.
The Washington Post also reported that U.S. senators are seeking information about $140,000 paid to Miers' Dallas law firm when President George W. Bush was running for Texas governor in 1998.
-Dan
As "conservative" as Teresa Heinz-Kerry... only without the reeking musk of old gin.
LOL. Spin it baby!
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/10/21/AR2005102102139.html
Miers was a believer in mentoring programs, but during her tenure she and the board of directors went further, passing a resolution urging Texas law firms to set a goal of hiring one qualified minority lawyer for every 10 new associates. The directors also reiterated support for a policy of setting aside a specific number of seats on the board for women and minorities.
John Yoo, a conservative law professor at University of California at Berkeley who served as deputy assistant attorney general during President Bush's first term, said the fact that Miers did not object to the policy "is another worrying sign that her real views on the kind of issues she'll decide on the Supreme Court are not as conservative as President Bush suggests."
"When you start setting numbers like that, you can call it a goal or anything else, but it smells like a quota," he said. "The message is pretty clear -- you are encouraging hiring based on race."
Bush has said he opposes quotas, and in a major 2003 Supreme Court case on affirmative action, his administration argued against race-based admissions policies at the University of Michigan. But the administration, led by Gonzales, disappointed conservatives by pressing a narrow argument that objected only to the way in which Michigan had pursued diversity, not to the diversity rationale for affirmative action itself.
And how about the NBA? Should that reflect our population as a whole? The United States has a Black population of 12%. The NBA has a Black population that is over 80%. QUICK--DO SOMETHING!!!
But... but... but... trust Bush!
Miers really has to walk a tightrope to be confirmed. Revelations such as this one which question her conservatism will potentially cost her votes from Republicans. Revelations about her Christian faith (which then implies an anti-abortion stance) will cost her votes from Democrats. If she was as brilliant as Roberts, she might be able to pull it off, but it's clear that she isn't.
Bush might actually have a better chance of getting one of the "big name" conservatives confirmed. Someone like Brown or Owen would only get attacked from one side. The nuclear option would shut down the Schumerites. If we don't have enough Republican votes to pull off the nuclear option, and it is tried and fails, at least we conservatives will understand why a stealth candidate with inferior credentials would be Bush's only option. Right now, we don't believe it.
In the works.
Notice the increasing number of imports from Europe, the Balkans, South America and even China? :-)
I have been keepin goff these threads, but.....
There is a big difference between Government Mandated Affirmative Action and Industry Initiated Hiring Goals, and, if such things are necessary at all, it is far better that industry initiate them than to have the Fed's mandate them!
FWIW: I think the MSM is having a great time with Meiers - they can just pick out any little fact and the conservatives will go nuts about it for days.....
I trust him on:
WOT, Iraq, Syria, North Korea, Tax Cuts, Guns
On Miers:
NO WAY!
Just because she has been a liberal most of her adult life does not mean that she may think like a liberal once she gets on the Supreme Court.
Don't you know?
</S>
Judging by the fact President Bush nominated Harriet Miers instead of much more qualified legal minds, it would appear Bush actually believes in "gender set-asides" (or quotas), as well.
Somebody get Ted Olson on the phone, so we can put an end to the Miers circus.
:-)
When Miers assumed the Presidency of the Texas Bar Association in June 1992, her responsibilities included making every effort to attain the goals and objectives set forth in the Association's Strategic Plan. The views attributed to Miers were established objectives of the Association's plan long before she became its president.
I think the MSM is having a great time with Meiers - they can just pick out any little fact and the conservatives will go nuts about it for days.....
Yep.
This, as written, is confusing. First off, "our legal community must reflect our population as a whole". Then, "supported racial and gender set-asides and numerical targets for jobs". Some clarifying details are not here.
'bout sums up the situation as best as yet I've read. And, I now agree -- after reading and hearing what's been written and said about Miers in these past two weeks -- that she doesn't suggest a great or even talented intellect, but an adequate one. I'm now concerned about Miers' nomination.
However, the so-called conservative media who has been hammering on about her in intensely negative fashion has done nothing to formulate reasonable causes to decline her and I do think the Miers nomination has revealed a higher degree of unreasonableness among conservative media than I am comfortable with, either.
I tend to think that Miers nomination was a Laura Bush construct.
First of all, isn't it possible that the lawyers organization took stands that she did not agree with?
And secondly, if a company VOLUNTARILY sets goals for hiring minorities, that is one thing. If a GOVERNMENT entity forced a company to do so, it is totally different.
I am an employer. One location we have is surrounded with more minorites than in our other locations. So it made sense for us to look for minority employees.
But the government did not force us to do it.
I don't see any evidence that she supported government forced quotas.
Ronald Reagan was a FDR democrat and a union President.
We have no way of objectively learning if Miers has had a similar political/philosophical metanoia.
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.