Posted on 10/13/2005 5:47:35 PM PDT by baystaterebel
White House officials have a message for conservative Republican senators who have expressed doubt about supporting Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers.
The West Wing types argue that she will turn out to be just as conservative as President Bush says she is, and voting against her would be an embarrassment over the long term. This message is intended for holdouts including Sam Brownback of Kansas, Tom Coburn of Oklahoma, and Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania.
"If Miers is confirmed and she winds up being what the president says she is, Republican senators who voted against her will look quite foolish," says a GOP insider. This could cause a backlash against these legislators from conservative Bush supporters at the grass roots.
(Excerpt) Read more at usnews.com ...
Note that what they SAID is not like the inflamatory headline.
They didn't warn the senators to support his nominee "or else".
They made the observation that, when she wins the nomination (which that still say she will), she will sit on the bench.
And in a couple of years, when it turns out she is a scalia or thomas, at least in result, the conservatives who weren't against the nominee from the beginning would look at senators who voted against her because she wasn't conservative enough will have lost some credibility.
I would say this differently, because I disagree with them. If she makes it, and the next nominee isn't trashed because of what the conservatives do to her, and everybody turns out to be great nominees, NOBODY will remember this crap 10 years from now, except when new nominees come up.
Why would I lash out at someone who to a principle stand to stop someone they thought would be bad, even if they turn out good? It's like being mad the coach didn't call a bunt when the guy hits a home run.
Now, the pundits who all promise she's a terrible nominee might have to look for new jobs -- they will have lost their credibility (if they had any).
However, if Miers is rejected, and a "more conservative" nominee is sent up, and that nominee turns out to be a souter after getting the appointment -- then there will be a backlash against everybody who fought this nominee.
What the White house is saying is that opposing this nominee isn't a FREEBEE for the conservatives. Because, as I and many others have said, you don't KNOW she won't be a great justice. You are just scared because you don't know she will be. I understand, I'm a little scared too.
But I trust the president to a point, and if he turns out to have been right, and his detractors turn out to have been wrong, there could be consequences to that result.
For example, if Miers has been on the court for a while, and all her votes are solid, Brownback will NOT get the nomination for president if he votes against her. Why?
Because he will be judged on his "judgment" of judicial nominees, and will be found wanting.
On the other hand, if he saved us from Harriet, we will never know what he saved us from, so unless the replacement is a second coming of Scalia, he will also not get the nomination.
That is what "warning" means.
And who will look foolish if she gets in there and votes like Souter? We'll be stuck with her for decades while everyone forgets who was foolish when it counted, when it's too late to matter any longer.
go newbie!
Are you starting a draft-Toomey movement for the primary?
but damnit, GWB said to trust him and we did, so that's the most important thing!
I guess they don't get it. This job is for life. All you can do once a judge is confirmed and they screw up is say "oops, sorry,my bad!"
That's not acceptable.
Is this really the best that the White House can do? Are they going to run ads against conservative senators in '06? I don't think so. Elections are over a year away, and how senators vote now is irrelevant, especially considering that it's unlikely that Miers will do anything of immediate substance in the next year or so.
I don't read this as "affirmative" at all. He is saying that she deserves a hearing. That's it. I don't see how this can be read as support for her nomination.
Like me, he's taking a "wait and see" attitude. Of course, he gets a vote and I don't.
As a conservative Republican, President Bush never ceases to disappoint me. With all the outstanding conservative jurists already in the system, Bush has to appoint a croney whose past record indicates she is no more than a politician rather than a constitutional scholar. Our only hope is that she is rejected by the senate. Her confirmation will be a serious blow to the Republicans in future elections.
As a conservative Republican, President Bush never ceases to disappoint me. With all the outstanding conservative jurists already in the system, Bush has to appoint a croney whose past record indicates she is no more than a politician rather than a constitutional scholar. Our only hope is that she is rejected by the senate. Her confirmation will be a serious blow to the Republicans in future elections.
This entire process is perfectly demonstrative of why the president should not be extended trust here. Confirmed or not, there is absolutely no winning in this fight for Miers. It's shocking to me, that they do not seem to realize this and are gearing up to fight back. It's just a question of how much you lose and under what circumstances.
Picking an avoidable fight with your strongest (and frankly only) supporters at a time when you need to be consolidating their support, is a perfect demonstration of Bush's wildly illogical political judgement lately. How can you say that after this spectacularly incorrect assessment of what we will acquiesce with, that Bush even has a clue at this point what we are expecting from her votes? I don't know what's gotten into the man. This is a slow hemoraging political suicide, waged by a party leader on his own party, when he's surrounded on all sides by emboldened and hostile external enemies. It's nuts.
I cannot recall a president or his staff threatning conservatives like I am now seeing. First it was Laura Bush's sexist comment, then I read how Bush is trying to use raw power from Iowa and NH and now threatning senators.
If I was going to use threats why not direct them at Harry Reid and the filibustering democrats. He's fought dirtier for this nomination than he ever did for Pickering, Estrada and the list of others who went down a sink hole without a rope.
He is brave enough to go to the mat in Iraq, a just and necessary war, but is frightened to take on the democrats and a couple of RINO's. Then appoints a crony who may be the keeper of some serious secrets.
I'll make a prediction. She ain't gonna make it.
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.