Posted on 10/11/2005 5:30:20 AM PDT by conservativecorner
'It's not a rebellion, sire: It's a revolution." With those words, the duke of La Rochefoucauld-Liancourt broke the news to Louis XVI that the Bastille had fallen. Looking back on the events of the past eight days, I wonder whether the Bush White House does not feel the same way.
The President's decision to replace retiring Supreme Court justice Sandra Day O'Connor with his White House counsel and former personal attorney, the underwhelming Harriet Miers, has detonated an uprising within the President's own party.
Conservative commentators Laura Ingraham, Rush Limbaugh, George Will, Patrick Buchanan, Charles Krauthammer, William Kristol, Michelle Malkin and many, many others have condemned the choice.
Washington's tight-knit and usually close-mouthed network of conservative jurists and lawyers is dismayed by Miers' thin record and weak abilities. One Republican lawyer told me of a briefing session to prepare Miers to enter into her duties as White House Counsel a year ago. A panel of lawyers who had served in past Republican White Houses was gathered together. After a couple of hours of questions and answers, Miers left to return to the office. There was a silence. Then somebody hopefully piped up: "Maybe if we can find her a really strong deputy ..."
The anger of conservative legalists and opinion leaders is echoed by rank-and-file Republicans. Last week, I asked readers of the conservative National Review Online Web site to tell me how they would vote on the nomination as U.S. senators: They voted 5-1 to reject the nomination. And while the aye votes were usually expressed in cautious and uncertain terms ("I think we just have to trust the President"), the nays were furious ("not just no -- hell no!")
These impressions are confirmed by opinion polls. A CBS poll conducted last week found that the Miers nomination was the most unpopular since Robert Bork's in 1987. Gallup found that while 77% of self-identified conservatives had supported the Roberts' choice, only 58% supported Miers. Both those polls were taken before at the very beginning of last week's spasm of negative media commentary.
CBS last week also released new presidential approval numbers, based on a survey conducted October 3-5. Bush is down to 37%, the lowest presidential approval rating since the Carter years. That number is buoyed, though, by the President's continued high approval rating among conservatives: 80%.
But Oct. 3 was the date that the Miers nomination was announced. As conservatives digest their disappointment and betrayal, their approval of the President is likely to decline. It's hard to say how powerful this effect will be overall, but here's one clue: A poll Monday of 200 right-of-centre bloggers by the RightWingNews.com Web site found that 49% regarded the appointment as a "bad or terrible" decision. Only 9% rated it "good or excellent." And while 4% of the bloggers said that the decision raised their opinion of President Bush, 53% made them view the President less favourably.
While it would seem unlikely that conservatives overall would react as strongly as these intensely political bloggers, the trend and tendency are both clear.
The problem is made worse by the White House's publicity campaign in defence of Miers. Advocates of the appointment have accused critics of "sexism" and "elitism" -- charges that have been echoed by left-wing Democrats like Maryland Senator Barbara Mikulski. There are probably few tactics less likely to impress a conservative audience -- or more likely to convince that audience that Miers is indeed the unqualified crony her critics say she is.
The only thing worse may be the White House's second talking point: emphasizing Miers' personal qualities. Former White House aide David Kuo tells this story in an op-ed posted on the beliefnet.com Web site:
"Harriet used to keep a humidor full of M&Ms in her West Wing office. It wasn't a huge secret. She'd stash some boxes of the coveted red, white, and blue M&Ms in specially made boxes bearing George W. Bush's reprinted signature. Her door was always open and the M&Ms were always available. I dared ask one time why they were there. Her answer: 'I like M&Ms and I like sharing.' "
This anecdote almost invites the retort: Well why don't we go all the way and put Barney the purple dinosaur on the court?
More seriously, it disregards and insults the seriousness with which conservatives have worked for three decades to bring change to America's high-handed courts. There is no domestic issue that conservatives care about more, nothing for which individual conservatives have made greater personal sacrifices than to get ready for the day when a conservative president and a Republican Senate would at last hold the power to fill that crucial swing seat on the court.
President Bush's decision to award that seat to his personal attorney in thanks for her years of service to himself personally has enraged his political base. Ann Coulter expressed that rage in her inimitably astringent way two days after the nomination was announced: "Being on the Supreme Court isn't like winning a 'Best Employee of the Month' award. However nice, helpful, prompt and tidy she is, Harriet Miers isn't qualified to play a Supreme Court justice on The West Wing, let alone to be a real one."
Offending your supporters has real-world consequences. With one grave misjudgment, George W. Bush has shattered the coalition that brought and returned him to power in 2000 and 2004.
Bush is stubborn, but everybody makes mistakes.
He should swallow his pride and withdrawl the nomination.
...for the good of the Party.
The big question is, where is Frumm coming from? He's way far off the deep end. Farther than the now-silly-shrillster Ann Coulter. When this is over there's going to be some new people on my list of never read (joining the august company of Molly Ivins and Maureen Dowd): Frum and Coulter are already there.
Yeah, but with the Miers nomination, we go neither hamburger nor filet mignon---more like tofu burgers---an unacceptable imitation of beef (as in "where's the ....").
What are her feelings? If she is someone that even thinks supporting the internation court might be a good idea is someone that should never be allowed to have a judgeship in this country. I am a conservative that was hoping for a strong conservative for the bench. Miers doesn't have a track record to back up the claims she is a conservative, nor is there any information on how she interprets constitutional law. The appointments to SCOTUS is the main reason I wanted W to be POTUS, but IMHO this smells of cronyism.
"Someone changed Souter and Kennedy? Don't you agree with that????"
I don't know that SOMEONE changed Souter or Kennedy. Maybe they were like this all along. That's why they were called "stealth candidates".
You forget, this is the fifth seat, the tie breaker!
Republican presidents havs a sad history of making mistakes on the court - Stevens, Kennedy, and Souter are the most recent.
P.S. Miers is also being called a stealth candidate.
LOL! From the evidence, it seems she's more likely a pro-life Souter.. On some issues, Id bet she's left of O'Connor (affirmative action, Title 9, eminent domain, civil "rights" issues, etc)
We can go through the blood-letting of the hearings, or she can resign now. I think it would probably be better if she just stepped down now..
That's the problem.
Make that nearly 40%. If that's the best you can count I suggest you just give it up. Catastrophic, pooch screwin ...You people with tunnel vision are missing a great presidency.
When was the last time you saw real leadership coming from our side?
Excellent - my first pledge!
The last paragraph nails it.
I never thought I would see the word "betrayal" speaking about George Bush, but that seems to be the word of choice. We worked too hard and too long to have this opening; the timing was perfect, the stage was set, and Bush killed 30 years of hopes and dreams about fairness (Constitutionalism) returning to the courts.
"Make that nearly 40%. If that's the best you can count I suggest you just give it up"
LOL, your forgetting about the undecideds smart guy...even at 40percent it is deathknell time...but it is probably much closer to 50%
Bush should withdrawl the nomination for the good of the Party.
Good question. Let's hope someone calls off the dogs for a while, at least until the hearings are held.
I'm wondering why folks who insisted on up or down votes when it was exceedingly hard to get them, are now hoping to prevent an up or down vote.
Maybe Schumer passed his virulence to others...is there a chance someone, somewhere is developing an antidote?
Persona non gratia
Chuck Schumer will act so superior
As he guts an opponent's interior.
He pretends he's so wise,
But it's only a guise,
And his motives are always ulterior.
Yes.
I think (not "feel") that it proves the point that all this hysteria over Bush 43 not choosing a "known" quantity is nonsense (in that the Miers' critics think they "know" the judges on their little lists better than President Bush) as you never know who is going to turn. Reagan and Bush 41 thought they were picking solid conservative judges and they were wrong.
Miers has a proven record of making some hard calls which bodes well that GWB's confidence that she'll not change is well placed.
But at the very least, it shows that all this Bush bashing over not choosing judges you think you "know" is ridiculous.
7 of the 9 were chosen by Republican Presidents who told us not to worry. The definition of stupidity is doing the same thing over and over and expect a different outcome.
***
BRAVO! So true...
Meirs has a proven record??? Please find it and post!
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.