Comments on: Who is Harriet Miers?

By: JD Pendry

JD Pendry — Sun, 09 Oct 2005 22:16:27 +0000

Pardon Me, If I choose not to ditto the conservative â€œthinkersâ€ on the nomination of Harriet Meirs to the Supreme Court.

By: Susie-Q&A

Susie-Q&A — Sun, 09 Oct 2005 03:27:34 +0000

Tired…Very, Very Tired

Birthday party today. Much work, much celebration. House looks…well, like a party took place here. Photoblogging to follow in the near future.

Mea…

By: Andy

Andy — Sat, 08 Oct 2005 18:48:02 +0000

Hektor, Evon, et al, DITTO!!! If we’re really going to get anywhere, the RINOs need to be turned out.

But again, this is where Bush blinked by supporting Specter and a few other RINOs over the past two elections and leaving better candidates to fend for themselves. Now given the high stakes, where he could use 61 solid supporters to push SS-PIA, SCTUS and other key initiatives thru, forget about filibusters — we’re lucky if we can even get 52 votes.

Ciao

By: Dee

Dee — Thu, 06 Oct 2005 04:02:41 +0000

The nomination of Judith Miers over a better known conservative candidate only exposes the cracks of the Republican coalition in the Senate. There might be a Republican majority in Congress but that doesn’t mean is a Conservative majority. The fact is that there are too many RINOS like Olympia Snow, Lincoln Chafee or John McCain that will vote against a true conservative judge in the Scalia or Thomas mold. The best the President can muster are stealth candidates like Roberts and Miers.

By: Evon

Evon — Thu, 06 Oct 2005 03:48:46 +0000

Hektor
Well said. The elitism of justices and judges first occurred to me after Ruth Bader Gisnberg complained about people not respecting judges during the 2000 election events. These are the people who say that burning flags is OK and all manner of vile speech is protected but she wants to be sure that we respect judges and the court.

After taking an oath to uphold the Constitution of the United States, some of the justices supported their decisions by quoting the laws and judicial decisions of other countries. So if some cartoonist wants to draw Justices O’Connor and Souter and Ginsberg in black stockings and garters locked arm in arm with European judges similarly dressed doing the Cosmopolitan Can-Can, why not?

The exclusionary rule turning criminals free to harm the rest of us may be necessary to keep the police from running roughshod over people’s rights. But then, judges should not squeal like stuck pigs when violence touches them or their families. They have simply joined the rest of us vulnerable citizens.

I’m waiting for the hearings to determine what I think of Miers. That she was co-manager of a large law firm in “fly-over land” and didn’t go to an Ivy League school speaks well for her, in my estimation. So far, I haven’t heard anything that disqualifies her. On with the hearings.

By: Hektor

Hektor — Thu, 06 Oct 2005 01:58:50 +0000

After listening to the criticism, both left and right, of Pres Bush’s selection of Harriett Mieres, I deduce that the substance of the complaints is that she not a “scintillating intellect.” Both sides appear to believe that since she’s not a legendary lawyer who’s argued cases before the Supreme Court, or clerked for one of the Justices, then she’s somehow unqualified for the job. Apparently, qualifications in this instance are defined as being an insider with respect to American jurisprudence.

The bottomline appears to be that, since she only brings experience in the trenches, she’s not good enough. Apparently, practicing law on the receiving end of the legal decisions rendered by the Supreme Court over the past generation isn’t good enough.

Friends, we’ve endured the ivory tower precedents handed down by Justices who never got their hands dirty, and haven’t had to live with the consequences of their decisions, for nearly 40 years. The chaos in our judicial system today is the product of “scintillating intellects.” Enough is enough.

In the absence of a “sufficient” legal record, I suggest we instead form our judgments on the basis of the character of the person nominating her…Pres Bush. You may disagree with some of his actions (I do) but I’ve yet to hear anyone whose opinion is worth listening to ever accuse him of being a dishonorable person. I’ll trust his opinion of her, since I don’t know her myself.

Hektor

By: salt1907

salt1907 — Wed, 05 Oct 2005 21:54:28 +0000

I have an idea as to how to handle the Miers nomination. Click on my name if the hyperlink doesn't work. BTW, Bush has many battles right now, but none more important than appointing a conservative Supreme Court. He can lose the other battles as long he gets a conservative Court.

By: OKIE on the LAM - In LA

OKIE on the LAM - In LA — Wed, 05 Oct 2005 20:39:04 +0000

Just Itchin’ For A Fight

Here we go again! Lot’s happening and I’m buried up past my eyeballs in stuff to do, and also with helping the wife at her office, but I can’t just let the Harriet Miers nomination pass without some comment on all the hullabaloo that is swirling eve…

By: The Therapist

The Therapist — Wed, 05 Oct 2005 15:46:44 +0000

“Souterized” and “Cauterized” have a two-letter difference. And a lifetime of similarity.

-T

By: Evon

Evon — Wed, 05 Oct 2005 15:41:41 +0000

Miers was on the short list of nominees acceptable to Senate Democrats given to President Bush. Bush is giving them what they said they wanted–a non-judge from someplace else than the Ivy League. I can’t believe that bunch of elitists (and this includes a lot of Republicans} in the Senate meant what they said. They’ll find an excuse to sink this candidate. I’ll be listening to the hearings and then I’ll make up my mind. When I was active in NOW feminists used to brag about “borking” a nominee. My guess is that President Bush doesn’t want to be “Souterized.”

By: Chris

Chris — Wed, 05 Oct 2005 15:11:20 +0000

I’m surprised to read that you don’t care, yes clinton did the same thing, no it didn’t kill us, YET. but a few more ginsburgs, or switch hitters like souter can kill our way of life. This is not something that should be taken lightly like the U.N representative, or the fema director, this is a lifetime appointment.

By: The Therapist

The Therapist — Wed, 05 Oct 2005 14:17:03 +0000

When the dust settles, Bush isn’t going to pull his nominee anyway. That’s the problem. For once, his iron-clad resolve could have sunk the court.

Janice Rogers Brown. Three little words that would have avoided this whole “Cheney goes to Limbaugh” fiasco.

-T

By: RedBeard

RedBeard — Wed, 05 Oct 2005 13:13:48 +0000

I’m with Merry. Wait until the dust settles a bit so we can see this person more clearly.

THEN panic.

By: Aidan Maconachy

Aidan Maconachy — Wed, 05 Oct 2005 06:09:11 +0000

She looks like the woman who works in the foodmart we go to. I also saw a few runors on the blogosphere relating to her um … orientation … not that it really matters a whole heck of a lot … if it’s even true that is.

I saw her with Harry Reid on a walkabout on CNN. At one point Harry leans into the camera and said – “she gave money to Al Gore you know, and that makes me feel better.”

I wasn’t sure if he was kidding or not.

By: The Therapist

The Therapist — Wed, 05 Oct 2005 04:40:38 +0000

Who wants a fight? I want something less abstract than a Rorscach blot for a court pick.

Unfortunately, a good candidate augurs a fight with the left, becaue the court is their only portal with which to satiate their bloodlust for abortion and for exiling the Boy Scouts. So what? We went to Afghanistan. We went to Iraq. Why can’t we just go ahead and go to the mat on the Senate floor?

And I don’t buy the argumant that Bush is too “weighted down by events” to do this. THIS is his job, and he chooses to germinate a mysterious judicial bean, than to transplant the fully-grown plant.

-T