Monday, October 03, 2005

Harriet Miers?

Harriet Miers

Before I say anything else, let me remind everyone reading this that I am an unabashed fan of George W. Bush, as all the posts on this blog demonstrate.

That's why I find the Harriet Miers nomination downright disturbing. Here is Ms. Miers' biographical summary.

I have lots of questions:

At a time when the Democrats are trying to gin up claims of cronyism against GWB, he nominates a close friend and the White House Counsel, whose record cannot hold a candle to the other names under consideration. Why?

If he wanted to appoint a woman, why not one of the many others available with serious credentials?

Why nominate someone who is 60 years old?

Why follow the home-run Roberts nomination with someone like this?

Why demoralize your base at a time when it needs energizing?

This looks like a willfully contrarian action that calls into question the usual Bush probity and care in making such momentous decisions. What is going on?

I am prepared to be convinced that nominating Miers was the right thing to do, but it isn't going to be easy for me or the great majority of other conservatives.

UPDATE: David Frum has some depressing but persuasive thoughts.

UPDATE II: Hugh Hewitt is more optimistic. I hope he's right. What bothers me is that we are one again in the position of hoping we have not been burned.

UPDATE III: Michelle Malkin has a good round-up of conservative dismay. This one is looking like a fumble to me.


Anonymous BlueBuffoon said...

Hedgehog, I share your disappointment and concern--despite the optimism of Hugh Hewitt .

If Roberts was a home run, the Meirs nomination appears to be--at best, at least for now--a bunt.

If the President is concerned about his poll numbers and the aftermath of Katrina, hunkering down with another insider doesn't help at all. Some Dems were already crying chronyism as the word leaked.

I too would like to be convinced, but it will require one impressive selling job. The announcement this morning certainly didn't make me want to stand up and proudly support the President's decision. 

Posted by BlueBuffoon

Monday, October 03, 2005 7:36:00 AM  
Anonymous Ralph Kostant said...

I concur with the misgivings. By selecting a nominee who is 60 years of age, the President has passed on the opportunity to add a Justice to the court whose influence is likely to extend long beyond the end of the Bush Presidency. It is also noteworthy that Senator Reid apparently indicated to the President that he would support a nomination of Ms. Miers. 

Posted by Ralph Kostant

Monday, October 03, 2005 11:01:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I'm gonna stick with HH on this one, If you remember his track record, he has an odd way of being right most of the time. Besides, does anybody honestly believe the president DOESN'T know about all the vitriol toward him? I don't think he would do something like this unless there was a solid case behind it. I'm taking a position of cautious optimism for the time being, hoping this won't be another social security mess... Remember he's surrounded by a lot of very smart people.

Also, me personally, I think this is a good move, screw the politics because like Bolton to the UN, getting a little outside experience might be good for SCOTUS, might help dismiss some of the PC nonsense and euro-centrist thinking that's been so prevalant lately. 

Posted by Mike M

Monday, October 03, 2005 4:03:00 PM  
Blogger Mike M said...

Anonymous? I'm not Anonymous...previous comment was me, all the way.

Monday, October 03, 2005 4:04:00 PM  
Anonymous Charlie Shipp said...

President Bush made a great choice; she will make conservatives proud. She has a great track record as a trial lawyer and serving the White House. What would be great would be if she were rejected by Democrats and some liberal Republicans, and Judge Brown nominated next; and then, finally, for the winning candidate: Miguel Estrada. But (as noted by Rush Limbaugh) Harriet Ellan Miers will most likely be confirmed. As Dick Cheney notes: 'Harriet will have ten great years and vote with Scalia and Clarence Thomas.' What more could you want?

Here is a note we all remember:
The Boston Globe September 5, 2003
WASHINGTON - Miguel A. Estrada, President Bush's most embattled choice for a federal judgeship, withdrew yesterday after waiting more than two years for the Senate to vote on his nomination.
It was the first time that the Democratic minority has scuttled a Bush nominee to a federal court seat - a rare defeat for a judicial appointee who had majority support in the Senate. Estrada pulled out after the Senate seven times refused to end a Democratic filibuster. [[ TIME TO BRING HIM BACK ]]

[[ Maybe Democrats see this strategy, and roll dice for H.E.Miers.]] 

Posted by Charlie Shipp

Monday, October 03, 2005 11:03:00 PM  
Anonymous Kate H said...

She is jst a little too  happy to be GWB's friend - her lips seem sewn to his posterior. The world sees that - I hope the Senate does too:

From the Australian:
"The Texas state library has released more than 2000 documents detailing correspondence between Ms Miers and Mr Bush when he was governor of Texas.

The notes reveal the deep friendship between the two and praise verging on the fawning from Ms Miers, who has never been far from Mr Bush's side since becoming his personal lawyer in the mid-90s.

I'm a Democrat who was in favor of John Roberts because of his experience. My feeling is that the criticism for Miers isn't sexist, it's valid. There are many qualified sitting judges, both women and men, who deserve a look before this goes further. 

Posted by KateH

Wednesday, October 12, 2005 11:58:00 AM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home