Friday, October 28, 2005

Hugh Hewitt's Piece on The Damage Done by The Conservative Miers Opposition

Read it here. I don't think this is one that Laura Ingraham will be reading triumphantly on the air today, with occasional high-pitched giggles from her sidekick Lee. Disagreement with the host is simply not part of that show, at least not on the Miers issue.

The key graph from Hugh's piece:

The right's embrace in the Miers nomination of tactics previously exclusive to the left - exaggeration, invective, anonymous sources, an unbroken stream of new charges, television advertisements paid for by secret sources - will make it immeasurably harder to denounce and deflect such assaults when the Democrats make them the next time around. Given the overemphasis on admittedly ambiguous speeches Miers made more than a decade ago, conservative activists will find it difficult to take on liberals in their parallel efforts to destroy some future Robert Bork.
Hugh raises an interesting and undeniable point: The next time liberals savage a Bush nominee to the bench, and try to deny that nominee an up-or-down vote, will George Will be in any position to complain? Will Laura? Or Rush? Krauthammer? Hannity? Fund? Frum? and so on?

Those folks have taken themselves out of the game. That's a real loss, because collectively they are obviously powerful and effective voices.

We'll all hold our breath and hope Bush can come up with a nominee whom the anti-Miers people find acceptable. I will never feel the same about those people, but as a conservative Republican I'm still happy to make common cause with them for a strong nominee.

UPDATE: Laura Ingraham had a mutually congratulatory interview this morning with George Will. It was actually pretty funny (not that Laura intended it that way). Laura said she thinks Harriet Miers was treated fairly, and that Miers would have fared worse had she not been a woman.

Really? Caligula's horse? Bush's "office wife?" Barney the dog? A "medocrity?" If it's fair to call Miers those things, then George Washington was a monkey. And we won't say anything about Laura's condescencion regarding Miers' sex.

5 Comments:

Blogger Mark said...

Because the discussion over the Miers nomination was internal to the party and outside of the Senate Confirmation process I do not believe there was any damage done here.  

Posted by Mark

Friday, October 28, 2005 6:07:00 AM  
Blogger The Hedgehog said...

Mark: I disagree that it was internal to the party.It was a very public and embarrassing fight, and it was all over the MSM, talk radio, and the blogosphere. 

Posted by The Hedgehog

Friday, October 28, 2005 6:11:00 AM  
Blogger Mark said...

Public yes. Involving Democrats or the actual confirmation process? No. This was more like watching a football game with 3 seconds left on the clock. The coach calls a timeout and gets the team together on the sidelines and they get all fired up about what is about to happen. They go out on the field and score the winning touchdown. Everyone watched. Everyone knew what was coming, including the other team. Do the Democrats know what is coming now? Yes, and our team knows exactly how we are going to win the game!  

Posted by Mark

Friday, October 28, 2005 7:04:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Don't forget "crony". A claim that Miers was treated fairly is indeed quite funny.

How about a new verb for the language. "Miered" meaning "to be Borked by false friends"? 

Posted by Bob

Friday, October 28, 2005 8:26:00 AM  
Anonymous Rob said...

miered is ok, however how about "Miers got munsoned"
(to understand the term one has to see the movie KINGPIN, which the Farrelly Bros have long claimed to be their greatest movie, which sad to say got tagged as a bowling movie, and ended up with a small box office) 

Posted by Rob

Saturday, October 29, 2005 11:12:00 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home