Krauthammer: Retreat (on Miers' nomination to SCOTUS)

Townhall.com ^ | 10-7-05 | Charles Krauthammer

[cgk]

WASHINGTON -- When in 1962 Edward Moore Kennedy ran for his brother's seat in the Senate, his opponent famously said that if Kennedy's name had been Edward Moore, his candidacy would have been a joke. If Harriet Miers were not a crony of the president of the United States, her nomination to the Supreme Court would be a joke, as it would have occurred to no one else to nominate her.

[battletank]

I also caught Michael Medved and Michael Reagan having serious questions about this nomination the other night on the radio.

[gov_bean_ counter]

TDSFW.

I really wish we had more big picture thinkers in the "conservative movement". Miss M, what do you think Ruth Buzzy Ginsburg and the other old lib fart are going to do when they come to the realization that their votes no longer matter. A protracted fight over the "known quantity" puts their day of reckoning farther away.

A quick confirmation of a conservative appointee virtually guarantees two more vacancies in short order. Then will be the time for the knockdown drag out we all are looking forward to.

[safisoft]

Another "pro abortion" "elitist" "snob" who "haven't taken his meds" in the Free Republic doghouse!

Plus, all these closet liberals are stupid too. They don't recognize stategery! Rove is a genieous.

Bush-bots will never get it. They think that all dissent is a sign of disloyalty to cause. It is not. Those who are loyal conservatives have never placed their leaders above principles.

Come 2006 and 2008, they will be blaming us still - when they should be blaming their President, who unecessarily make such a silly choice.

[aft_lizard]

There you go again calling people a liar. Well guess what you are the liar here now go away.

[Mamzelle]

re: Perhaps Mr. Krauthammer can complain about the competence and conservatism of this nomination; I, myself, am going to complain about the competence of a conservative pundit who draws his paycheck from the Washington Post)))

They do tend to forget that they serve at the pleasure of their readers. I have long wished for a whole new, bright, generation of conservative punditeers that do not hail from the northern Atlantic.

[ZULU]

I am beginning to understand the mentality behind fascism.

Bush is by no means a fascist. But the mindset of some of his supporters must be similar to the mindset of those people.

I support Bush when I think he's right and criticize him when I thin he's wrong. I think you should be loyal to a political philosophy, not to an individual. Not unless that individual personifies your political philosophy - like Ronald Reagan for instance.

But I guess people like you and I don't see eye to eye on that with the Bush Bots. ( Is that Bot like in botfly?)

[Plutarch]

Reading some of the Bush supporters I feel I am witnessing the birth of a new religion.

LOL

[kevinm13]

What has changed from Monday that your support for Bush is different? Miers is an unknown to most of us Freepers, although as it has been pointed out she was on some lists for the Roberts nomination. President Bush has done what he said he would do. Not many other politicians have that kind of record. You may disagree with him on some aspect of his agenda. I don't agree that immigration is given a pass and spending has been allowed to get way out of hand, but he said he would nominate justices in the mold of Thomas and Scalia and I believe he has.

If in the hearings process something comes out to suggest that she doesn't fit, then you are justified in your actions. Otherwise, you make no sense. Rethink your position because the alternative is far from what you want to think about. Imagine a nominee from a possible President Kerry in the mold of Ginsberg. God Help us.

[safisoft]

I guess the Bushbots will now add Krauthammer to their "moonbat" list.

True. Freeper Danes has now added Ronald Reagan to it.

In the end it will be them, the RINOS, and Bush - but they will still think that they are the true 'conservatives'.

[rogue yam]

A liar? I suggest you read Ann Coulters piece, and after you do come back and kiss m a**, nah a apoligy will suffice.

I have read Ann's piece. It does not say what you claim it does. You are a liar and a retard.

[stop_fascism]

Actually, that's fine with me, but she need's something better than "Miers didn't go to Harvard" to base it on.

Maybe Miers is the worst pick in history, but at this point, nobody has demonstrated that. Let's have some facts.

[over3Owithabrain]

Well, y'know, Charlie? If you hadn't had all those nice connections with the NYC literati and Partisan Review, no one would take seriously a Canadian shrink who liked to write political opinions and make everyone think he was so gosh-awful smart. I don't really take you at all seriously, myself, since I heard your hysterical ranting when "Passion of the Christ" hit the theatres. Someone really smoothed Krauthammer's path, not too different from a lot of people who end up with really cushy jobs. You've got lifetime pundit tenure--and you earned it---how? You didn't exactly carve your place out of the wilderness the way Rush did, now did you? And without the elder Partisan Review friendships, you wouldn't be the ersatz "resident expert" to try to get John McCain into the Whitehouse, or the US military involved in the BALKANS. The more I hear from these patronizing Northeastern bozos, the more I like Miers.

The above italicized is YOUR post. It is the one that you and I both know I was referring to. It is full of cheap shots - "Charlie, connections, Canadian shrink, hysterical, smoothed path, cushy job, patronizing bozo". And yet not ONE explanation on a point of disagreement of the substance of his article. That's what I called you on correctly, so trying to shift the foundation of my disagreement with you is without merit. You're mad because he criticized the Prez's pick. You don't like him or his ideas. Ok, but your vitriol and pettiness in disagreement is telling.

[Texas Federalist]

But that is the argument from some quarters of Conservatism, she didnt come from a first tier law school so therefore she isnt qualified, according to Coulter and many here.

Blatant lie. Neither of the candidates most of us would have preferred, Brown or Luttig, came from first tier law schools either. But they have distinguished themselves by their constitutional credentials. The point is, if you don't have an super-distinguished academic career, you better have a super-distinguished legal career. Is that too much to ask for the highest court in the land? I thought America was supposed to award hard work and achievement rather than political patronage and mediocrity.

[aft_lizard]

It says exactly what I calim it does, one of her arguments does indeed say what I say it does, did I clai it as a sole argument NO NO NO. You need to learn reading comprehension and quit insulting people you twerp.

[ZULU]

Levin cricised this choice scathingly on his radio show.
Levin un-qualifiedly supported Roberts. Levin's comments have been posted in this forum in the past few days. (I was uncertain about Roberts until Levin analyzed him and his background for me. I think he could be a great Justice.)

The same goes for Malkin.

Ann said that there is nothing in Miers background which distinguishes her to the point where she is in the same class as the numerous other individuals whose names have recently appeared on this forum like Owens and Brown. These are rock-solid originalists and strict intreprationists which a track record. She was on the Bill O'Reilly show recently and I suspect will write an editorial on the mediocrity called Miers soon. There is a link to her on the Drudgereport.com.

The Dems in Congress stared and Bush blinked. He picked somebody he was sure the Dems and the RINOs in his own party like McCain would support.

And he threw his promises, the American public, and his constituency to the wolves in the process.

[DallasMike]

Charles is being an elite Ivy League snob.

You're right -- it's elitist to suggest that one must have a degree from one of the select few East Coast schools in order to sit on the Supreme Court. The last I checked, Ronald Reagan attended Eureka College in Illinois and he sure turned out to be a decent statesman.

 

       

        <-------- Visit Stingray blogsite for conservative Christian commentary

[Mamzelle]

If you want to try to make the case of a Methodist Texas Rancher being a Northeastern Elite, you are welcome to try. Doesn't look to me as if the Ivy Taint has troubled him none.

On the other hand, Krauthammer is very much the Northerner (Great White North--erner) enthralled by the Ivory Tower and with vaguely European mannerisms. He way was greased by connections with the same "intellectual" folks that gave us Bill Kristol as Wise Man. And he's brilliant because...because...well, everyone knows he brilliant!

Since I'm not exactly happy with this nom, I wonder why the opposition pundits to her appointment all sound like such snobbish twerps.

Wish there were more, younger, Red State writers that we could "elect" to pundit status. I'm so tired of these old, tired Blue State bluebloods.

[aft_lizard]

My gawd people are you guys so in lock step that you do not even look up the facts? Coulter did indeed make the argument that one needs to come from a Elite School because they fought liberals there whole life and no how to defend against them. Look it up. Keep caling me a lia, it wil only make you look more the fool.

[rogue yam]

He's never hidden his intentions... he plans on promoting a conservative agenda.

So all of the conservatives, here on FR and elsewhere, both supporters and detractors of Harriet Miers' nomination, who talk of this nomination in terms of "confirmability," who describe it as a "stealth nomination," a "Trojan horse," or as "rope-a-dope," ALL of these people are either lying or else are just plain wrong?