FRUM: A SINKING NOMINATION

There has not been a moment since October 3 when I have not felt sick and sad about this Miers battle, but today may have been the worst day yet. This morning, the president mobilized Laura Bush to join him on national television and accuse critics of the Miers nomination of "sexism." Reading the transcript of the interview, you can feel this kind and gracious woman's disinclination to speak an untruth. "It's possible," she says. "I think it's possible."

What a terrible and false position to put the first lady in! And what a sign that the White House has finally understood that it has lost the argument over this nomination.

By asking the first lady to defend the nomination, the White House is implicitly admitting that the president's word alone has failed to carry the day: That, in other words, when he said, "Trust me," conservatives said "No." The first lady's appearance was a dangerous confession of personal and political weakness by the president - one that will be noticed and exploited by the president's Democratic opponents.

Even more ominously, the Today show interview announces a new strategy of trying to win the Miers nomination by waging war on the president's core supporters. In the first week of the battle, the White House sent out James Dobson to woo evangelical conservatives. That didn't work out too well. So now the White House has switched strategies. It has turned its back on conservative evangelicals and is instead using Laura Bush to woo suburban moderates. But remember: Laura Bush is on record as a supporter - not just of abortion rights - but of the Roe v. Wade decision. Interviewed on the Today program in January 2001, Mrs. Bush was asked point blank about the case. Her answer: "No, I don't think it should be overturned." Is it credible that Mrs. Bush would be endorsing Harriet Miers if the first lady thought that Miers would really do what James Dobson thinks she'll do?

It is madness for a 37% president to declare war on his strongest supporters, but that is exactly the strategy that this unwise nomination has forced upon President Bush. And every day that passes, he will get angrier, the attacks will get fiercer - and his political position will weaken.

That is why it is wrong and dangerous for Republicans to say, "Let's wait for the hearings." Even if the hearings start in the next couple of weeks, as the White House now says it wishes, the Miers matter will extend itself at least into November. That's a month and more of the president's team accusing the president's supporters of sexism, elitism, and who knows what else; a month of rising tension between this president and the conservatives who elected him; a month in which the president's poll numbers will drop even further. The longer it continues, the costlier this battle will prove for the president. And if forced to its ultimate conclusion, the odds are rising that this is a battle that will end in ultimate defeat for Miers and for Bush.

Under these circumstancs, the least bad solution is for the president to withdraw this nomination now, before he does himself further and growing harm.

Many readers have asked what they can do to help achieve a good resolution of this crisis.

First, please send an email to Rush Limbaugh and Laura Ingraham thanking them for their brave stance against this nomination. These two broadcasters have been tireless and fearless on this story - but they are under intense and increasing pressure, and it makes a huge difference to them to know that their work is heard and supported. (And let me add: It has made a huge difference to me as well.)

Next, communicate with the Republican Senators on the Judiciary committee. Lindsey Graham has already committed himself to the nominee, but the others have not - and Brownback in particular seems to be leaning negative. It will again make a huge difference to these senators to know that conservatives across America will support them if they stand up to White House pleasure.

Finally, some friends and I have drafted a petition to the president that we will shortly be putting on a webpage for all who wish to sign. Here's the draft text:

"WE ARE REPUBLICANS AND CONSERVATIVES who supported the election of George W. Bush in 2000 and 2004. Today, we respectfully urge that the nomination of Harriet Miers to the United States Supreme Court be withdrawn.

"The next justice of the Supreme Court should be a person of clear, consistent, and unashamed conservative philosophy.

"The next justice should be seen by all as an independent custodian of the constitution, untainted by any hint of secret pledges or political obligations.

"The next justice should be a person of the highest standard of intellectual and juridical excellence.

"For all Harriet Miers' many fine qualities and genuine achievements, we the undersigned believe that she is not that person. An attempt to push her nomination through the Senate will only split the Republican party, damage the Bush presidency, and cast doubts upon the Court itself.

"Sometimes Americans elect Republican presidents, sometimes we elect Democratic presidents. Whatever the differences between the parties, surely we can at least agree on this: Each party owes America its best. President Bush has a wide range of truly outstanding conservative jurists from which to choose. We believe that on second thought he can do better - for the Supreme Court, for conservatism, for America."

Comments on this draft text are welcome, but PLEASE do not yet send signatures. When the site is ready to take and forward your message to the White House, I'll post a note and link here at NRO. Don't worry, we'll act fast.

The problem is there should be a bit of evidence before the hearings. There is none except for her friendship with Bush. I agree with you that we should know more but it must not be easy to continuously defend Bush's nominee with so little information. Cautious skepticism seems a more rational path to me...If she truns out to be great..great...but the fact that we will only have the hearings to go on leave me a little short on the confidence scale...How will we know the answers she gives (to the questions posed) really represent her since she has no record that would confirm whatever she says at the hearings....The fact is this is a mess that should never have occurred...regardless of how afraid anyone is of an open debate on a well defined nominee. The debate itself has caused FReeper to insult Freeper. I have followed your posts calling out this problem of vitriol and they seem to always be directed toward chastizing those most concerned about Miers and never toward her arch defenders...One wonders at the fairness of that if you are really concerned about the rhetoric and not just shutting down the debate.....As it is we are stuck and we should not be.

Oh pod, I'm not blinded by emotion, I hope I am blinded by common sense.

I do not trust our President to a fault, I hope, but rather to the degree that he has earned my trust, and that degree is very high.

I believe him to be one of the most courageous, direct speaking, deeply faithful and tremendously wise leaders I have ever had the peaceful comfort and genuine gratefulness to experience.

There is probably no one in America who cares MORE about placing strictly constitutional Americans within our highest court than this President. These judges he nominates, if confirmed, will be making rulings WHILE our President is still a sitting President, there will be hugs accountability he will have to face should any of these folks trash the constitutional framework our highest court must support.

I also believe in a FAIR FIGHT and a PUBLIC HEARING before I rant and wail and throw in the towel regarding ANY human being nominated by this particular President And especially because Harriet is a person not known in the public spotlight. She is an unknown, not to the President, but to all of us.

That I am willing to wait and listen to her, to hear her MYSELF, is not placing blind trust in anyone, imo, but rather is taking an approach that is fair. And to me, this matters. My President has earned this willingness to listen before casting aspersions, at least in this house.

And President Bush has earned at least this modicum of respectful patience to a great degree considering the fact that I respect and deeply admire and have come to trust the amazing people he has chosen to oversee the federal agencies and courts within our nation.

Our President is fallible, he sure is, ie. he is hesitant to go after our border problem full bore because, I am guessing, congressmen and women and senators are pressuring him to avoid any drastic action, fearing a backlash at the voting booths. Democrats are in the same rotting row boat, here.

I know our President walks a fine line between doing what he knows is right and juxtaposing each action in relation to any damage such action would cause at the voting booth-the ( horrific ) destruction to our nation should we lose the majority in our house and senate in D.C.

It is tough stuff.

And our President has had the back of our military, the back of people like me who absolutely respect him to his very bone marrow for staying the course and he has gracefully fought a war on two fronts....terrorism and liberal traitors and dishonest and willing to distort news by a corrupt media. ( billy the out of control clinton never had to fight the mainstream press...folks like katie colic, dan blather, etc were forever kissing his fat arrogant arse, slobbering over it, in fact. Some rapists just get all the good luck. )

I admire his decisions. I admire the people he has chosen to surround himself with and to lead the various gov agencies and I would NEVER EVER be willing to accuse our President of hiring anyone he believed was the LESS THAN THE VERY BEST to serve our nation for the shallow, dangerous reason of rewarding cronies. Super HUGE HOGWASH.

That is such an insult to the terrific leadership of this ethical and moral and courageous leader that I refuse to even consider it...he has NOT EARNED such an insulting and degrading criticism....it stinks on the surface and it stinks all the way to the core of the idea.

So there! < and of course, hugs, because you know I have stood with you in DC and think the world of you, sauropod.

Can well understand you for not giving Harriet the chance (she most SURELY deserves as our President's choice BEFORE blasting her credentials and philosophy, imo) before she testifies before the judiciary committee (Pod-can do we really live in a world where slugs like kennedy and schummer are able to sit in judgment of genuinely good people of incredible integrity? Surreal stuff!)
After all, Pod, you have the company of thought by some of the best conservative thinkers in America, including Judge Bork.
But you do not have ALL of our conservative thinkers in your ball park. You just have some of the best :^)

One of us is wrong. I hope it is not me. But I will wait until I know more about Harriet before I decide she will be detrimental to our highest court, drifting leftwards and trashing our foundations, as it were.

And if she appears wishy washy, afraid of the uncivilized senators who will attempt to berate her in front of the cameras, if her temperment or answers chill me, I will be right here calling for her to be voted down in committee. >

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.