It looks like, just like East Coast liberals, D.C. conservatives think they're better than people in the rest of the country. They went to better schools, so they're smarter and hipper, and they can tell the rest of us what to do. (Sad to learn that Ann Coulter buys into this kind of ignorant elitism.) True conservatism holds just the opposite view - D.C. ISN't the center of the universe, and intelligence can be found throughout the country - and in schools in many states and regions.
My husband changed his mind on the Meir's nomination when he heard George Will's condemnation of her. He calls Will "every liberal's favorite conservative" and decides that if snobby Will is against her, that's a point in her favor.
Yeppurs.
Why do morons think that can change people's minds by insulting them? This has to rank as one of the stupidest 'arguements' of all time.
Methinks the so-called divide among we conservatives springs from the judicial goals we prioritize. An assumption that seems to be made too frequently is that all of us are all wound-up in the abortion and prayer in school battles. I, for one, am much more interested in whether the appointee would take world opinion into account when interpreting our Constitution. And if hate-crime legislation should be used to limit our right of free expression. Then, how about full enforcement of our immigration laws? Although these subjects are rarely brought to the forefront, I think a sizeable number of conservatives would like a little attention devoted to these questions.
He has faith and will weather this too. How I wish he didnt' have to deal with this, but he's got the strength and faith.
I will continue to pray for him and our country.
I think it is interesting and important to note the relative proportion of membership in various religious groups on the Supreme Court. I think that would make Harriet Miers the only evangelical baptist on the court.
And that could be why some conservatives, consciencely or unconsciencely oppose her.
Criticism of Harriet Miers never had anything to do with elitism, that's a complete straw-man argument. "The New Republic" is obviously just trying to marginalize conservatives within the Republican party by branding us "elitist"
Sure, frame the debate in terms of elitism. Sort of "Racist Lite." So easy to spread on bread.
People who insist on merit, are labeled "elitist" by people who are short on it.
This whole "elitist" thing is one big straw man.
I feel it fundamentally misrepresents the major issue at hand.
People just want a candidate with a well documented strict constructionist history. There are dozens of such candidates. This was not one of them. When campaigning, Bush promised to nominate such a justice, so many of his supporters rightly feel disappointed, even wronged, by him not doing so.
Liberal or conservative...East Coast elites, particularly inside the beltway, have always mocked anyone outside of their play-groups.
They didn't like Reagan but grudgingly got on board when the Revolution got rolling.
They like Bush even less and carped loudly about how he'd have to get rid of his TX advisors if he wanted to get so much as a pizza delivered in DC, then flipped over the genius of Karl Rove.
The best thing about elites is that they like keep to themselves, saving others the trouble of avoiding them.
As a matter of fact, a person who may have once embraced the so-called "liberal" philosophy and then studied the writings of America's Founders, of Adam Smith, of people like Dr. Russell Kirk and other great intellectual giants in our history of conservative thought, tend to be better informed and more able to defend the ideas of liberty than others of us.
We have showcase "conservative" talk show people who major in provocative talk, and they have served a worthwhile purpose in arousing public dialogue, but they should not mistake themselves for authentic scholars and sole defenders of the ideas that underlie our Constitution. When they do, they appear childish and shallow.
She's 61 years old, has the support of prominent disgusting leftists like Schumer and Feinstein, has no track record of conservative thought whatsoever, and the pick reeks of cronyism.
Not liking this has nothing to do with elitism, and I could care less what law school she went to.
This article = BS.
I went to an elite "blue state" isntitution earlier in my career and a not-so-elite SMU-esque "red-state" instution for law school. I don't have any sympathy for snobbery (especially the snooty East Coast variety), but I am solidly in favor of promoting known conservative intellectuals and jurists who are far more qualified than Miers.
It is important to remember that Miers' law school and law firm are not the sum total of her qualifications. In fact, they are a very small part of them. Many, many great lawyers and jurists have gone to these instutions or worked in firms similar to hers. By the looks of it, what she lacks (and others do not) is the preparation and experience necessary to make a formidable or (possibly) even a minimally competent SCOTUS justice.
Just off the top of my head, I can think of several good conservative judges on the Fifth Circuit who went to similar law schools (Barksdale, Jolly, Clement, Jones) but are far more qualified for nomination to the SCOTUS than her. In fact, in my very own semi-humble and quite conservative law firm, there are probably 5 to 10 people who have better and more impressive legal credentials than her. Unlike her, some of them (a) have argued a case before the Supreme Court (b) have a recognized and respected knowledge of constitutional law and (c) have spent time on the federal bench.
Snobbery has little to do with the conservative revolt brewing against the Miers nomination. Her lack of objective qualifications within her own profession have far more to do with it.
I may warm to Miers the justice. I will never warm to Miers the nomination. GW had the chance to "sack up" and nominate a heavy hitter, and have a big Senate showdown in full view of the country.
Instead we got the lady Harry Reid 'preapproved' or whatever that story was. Say what?
I feel bamboozled. Next time I'll donate to the NRA instead.