Posted on 10/27/2005 12:22:48 AM PDT by KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle
Among the documents presented to the Senate Judiciary Committee by Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers are copies of speeches she gave more than a decade ago. In one 1993 speech before a women's group in Dallas, Miers invoked what might be called a doctrine of self-determination.
Speaking about today's hot-button social issues, including abortion and church-state separation, Miers said, "The underlying theme in most of these cases is the insistence of more self-determination. And the more I think about these issues, the more self-determination makes sense."
She added, "The ongoing debate continues surrounding the attempt to once again criminalize abortions or to once and for all guarantee the freedom of the individual women's [sic] right to decide for herself whether she will have an abortion."
That line might comfortably fit inside a Planned Parenthood brochure.
Miers then delivered what one might reasonably conclude was a libertarian, not a conservative philosophical worldview. She said people who attempt to resolve such disputes should remember, "we gave up" a long time ago on "legislating religion or morality." If she has not changed her views for specific reasons since then, these statements make a mockery of President Bush's use of her flaunted "evangelical faith" as an indicator of her supposed true beliefs and how she would decide cases on these very subjects. An atheist or an agnostic would feel comfortable with the views expressed by Miers in that speech.
White House spokesman Jim Dyke tried to spin Miers' remarks, saying they are "entirely consistent" with the conservative doctrine of judicial restraint. "This is someone who sees an appropriate role for the courts and an appropriate role for the legislature," he said.
Not exactly. In another speech later that year titled "Women and Courage," Miers lamented the relatively high poverty rates in Texas at the time and said the public should not blame judges when the courts step in to solve certain problems. "Allowing conditions to exist so long and get so bad that resort to the courts is the only answer has not served our state well. Politicians who would cry, 'The court made me do it' or 'I did not do that - the courts did' should not be tolerated." Her implication being that the courts couldn't be blamed for activism when the legislature doesn't act. Yes they can. If the people don't like what their legislators do, or fail to do, they can engage in the self-determination of voting them out of office.
In those speeches, Miers doesn't sound like someone who has a clear view of the separate roles of the people's representatives and that of an unelected and unaccountable judiciary. She reflects the judicial activism conservatives have been battling for decades and it tells you why so many are in open rebellion against her nomination.
It appears to have escaped Miers' notice that in the case of abortion someone else is involved. It is one thing to self-determine to have sex. It is another to self-determine to kill the baby, which leaves no chance for that other "self" to make any determination about his or her own life. That strikes me as cold, hedonistic and selfish.
Could the president have known Harriet Miers for such a long time and not been aware of her views on the most important moral, religious and political issues of our time? No liberal president would nominate a stealth pro-life nominee to slip through, and none has since Roe v. Wade was decided. If Miers still believes these things, how could President Bush jeopardize his standing as an unyielding pro-lifer, not to mention most of his political base?
A government that allows "self-determination" in most personal matters is one that supports liberty. A government that allows its citizens to engage in behavior that undermines social structures and a sense of morality contributes to its own demise. Watch the HBO series "Rome." It shows where unrestrained self-determination leads.
I have not joined the pack calling for Harriet Miers to withdraw, but I'm getting close. She should be thoroughly grilled on these 1993 speeches and not allowed to get away with "confirmation conversion."
Miers might consult that Bible in which she says she believes and see the disastrous consequences of self-determination when practiced by the ancient Israelites. A good place to start is in Judges 21:25: "In those days Israel had no king; everyone did as he saw fit."
My pinglist runneth over...
"Laura, honey, who do you think I should nominate?"
Same reply to the last thread:
That does it. She's toast.
Wow! Since when are life and death issues not the business of policy makers?
("Denny Crane: Gun Control? For Communists. She's a liberal. Can't hunt.")
hehehehe...."George, you should seriously consider a woman. Only sexists can oppose a woman....like those at the CWA"
Are there any serious conservatives who would still back this woman? The nomination of this woman is an insult. We deserve an originalist, not this BS.
This is a stake in the heart of a key constituency. The noise will be deafening.
LOL
It certainly makes sense to question Miers closely about this; I only hope the tone is not deliberately hostile because it doesn't need to be. "Do you see a role for XXXX in YYYY sufficient to ZZZZ" is the general structure of such questions. If she insists on being a sphynx, at that point the thumbs down can be made.
Wrong! Doesn't make sense to question her at all. Let her prove her great loyalty to President Bush and compassionate conservatism and withdraw her nomination now.
The punishment first, then the trial. Gotcha.
"George, happy anniversary sweety! Nominate Harriet. She's such a wonderful friend to us, thinks you are the greatest, and just think... this would be a fitting capstone to our contributions to the future of SMU. When do we break ground on the presidential library?"
http://www.smu.edu/newsinfo/releases/00171.htmlSMU'S RELATIONSHIPS WITH PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH, LAURA BUSH, AND VICE PRESIDENT DICK CHENEY
First Lady Laura Welch Bush Laura Welch Bush earned a bachelor’s degree in elementary education from SMU in 1968 and has kept in touch with classmates and professors through the years. In 1999 Laura Bush received the SMU Distinguished Alumni Award for her achievements advancing libraries, literacy and childhood education, and in July 2000, Laura Bush was elected to a four-year term on the SMU Board of Trustees.
Also in 1999, SMU dedicated the Laura Bush Promenade, a sitting and garden area outside SMU’s Fondren Library Center. Texas Governor George W. Bush funded the promenade as a Christmas gift honoring his wife’s contributions to the advancement of literacy and literature. In addition, seven of the First Lady’s Kappa Alpha Theta sorority sisters from SMU honored her by giving funds to the library as a tribute to their friendship. Then-Governor and Mrs. Bush participated in the dedication ceremony. By coincidence, on campus that same day was former President George H. W. Bush, who was at SMU to deliver a major address. Father and son greeted each other on campus and met with members of the media.
President George W. Bush
In 1999, then-Governor Bush gave SMU $250,000 to fund the Laura Bush Promenade, a sitting and garden area outside SMU’s main library center. He gave the promenade in honor of his wife’s contributions to libraries, literacy, and education. He and his wife participated in the dedication of the Promenade in April 1999.On May 15, 1999, then-Governor Bush gave the address at SMU’s 84th annual commencement ceremony. He began his speech by saying: “The best decision I made in life was to marry into the SMU family.”
In August 2000, as Republican Presidential nominee, George W. Bush returned to campus to kick off his presidential campaign in Texas with a rally at SMU.
We don't usually let the mentally-challenged go to trial, but if you insist.
OK, the appeals first, then the punishment, then the trial.
I guess I'm not interested in an amateur "conservative", who didn't see the light until 1993.
I want the kind of conservative who could see the light, the instant their eyes opened...
Semper Fi
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.