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.
And another point - maybe you should look to the one who caused the huge rift in the party. His choice will lead to even lower poll numbers and make it harder for congressional Republicans to win. Doesn't he deserve a good share of the blame for putting the Republican Party in this position when it so easily could have been avoided?
That's a great starting point. After the hearings it'll be at an 80% mark. What is this "only" stuff?
Maybe he didn't. Maybe she's a big ole rino. But our demonizing her is not going to help one thing. Not one thing at all.
Even if he had put up a great conservative with a record, do you think he or she would have gotten through even with a fight? I seriously doubt it. We have misdirected the anger away from the RINOs in the Senate who cannot be counted on. When push comes to shove we really do not have a majority. If we want this fight, fight it where it counts. Our support must go to those who are bonified conservatives. No middle of the road candidates. RINOs rule right now. Don't like it, change it.
Seems to me that you already have a lock on that position.
If Miers makes it to the court, she sure won't owe the conservative elites any favors, will she?
(Yeah, yeah...I know it ain't supposed to run that way, but....)
They haven't even given her a chance yet to open her mouth.
"A Gallup Poll shows only 58% of conservatives supported Miers"
That's a great starting point. After the hearings it'll be at an 80% mark. What is this "only" stuff?"
If you can't spin any better than that I suggest you inquire with the Clinton people...they are good at it.
Nearly 50% of conservatives are against Miers...and you think that is good?? It is a catastrophe. Bush screwed the pooch.
Fine, then vote her down. That would be far worse politically and cause even greater damage to the party.
"You gotta step into the real world. People are people. This is a political court. Making enemies on it is just plain stupid."
If this is true, we should stop critisizing Breyer, Stevens, Ginsberg, Souter, or Kennedy.
Maybe if we're nice to them they'll change their opinions on Roe, or Kelo.
Fat chance of that happening.
Have Scalia or Thomas changed their stances on issues to appeal to more people? Maybe that's why I like them.
Maybe that's what I expected from Bush WHEN HE PROMISED TO APPOINT PEOPLE LIKE THEM!
I may agree with you on substance. But I dont trust you or anyone else to define what is conservative. In fact I dont even think the term is relevant. If you think all American's are equal under the constitution than I'm with ya. If you think the bill of Rights are the bedrock of protection of the citizen from the Government than we see eye to eye. If you think that the People loan power to the Government than we agree. If you believe that you are smarter than the President, then I suggest you run for office, give Americans your positions on the issues and woo them with your keen intellectual gifts. If you truly believe you are smart enough to do it than let me know an I will send money to your campaign.
What difference does it make when we are discussing the SCOTUS? How about we stop the deflecting of the real questions?
No one is suggesting the Senate should filibuster her. The suggestion is that the President should withdraw the nominee, or that she should be voted down.
Miers should withdraw her name.
I'm of the opinion that Bush Sr knew exactly what Souter was and W knows what Miers is, both bones thrown to the liberals of both parties.
Your language is insulting. Just as is that 'female nut' with the insulting T shirt flying from coast to coast.
Your ad hominem attack is ridiculous and only reveals the emptiness of your point of view. But it's not only absurd, it's pathetic.
Someone changed Souter and Kennedy? Don't you agree with that????
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.