« snake bursts after gobbling gator | Main | some awful good writing »
October 13, 2005
harriet miers: a nonpartisan anthology
Surely there are anthologies like this all over the Internet. I add another.
Against:
Ann Coulter--
Despite the astonishing fact that Miers was THE FIRST WOMAN to head the Texas Bar Association -- a dumping ground for losers, by the way -- Miers has not had the sort of legal career that shouts out "Supreme Court material"! That is, unless you think any female who manages to pass the bar exam has achieved a feat of unparalleled brilliance for her gender.
And also--
However nice, helpful, prompt and tidy she is, Harriet Miers isn't qualified to play a Supreme Court justice on "The West Wing," let alone to be a real one.
George Will--
It is not important that she be confirmed because there is no evidence that she is among the leading lights of American jurisprudence, or that she possesses talents commensurate with the Supreme Court's tasks. The president's "argument" for her amounts to: Trust me. There is no reason to, for several reasons.
He has neither the inclination nor the ability to make sophisticated judgments about competing approaches to construing the Constitution. Few presidents acquire such abilities in the course of their prepresidential careers, and this president, particularly, is not disposed to such reflections.
Furthermore, there is no reason to believe that Miers' nomination resulted from the president's careful consultation with people capable of such judgments. If 100 such people had been asked to list 100 individuals who have given evidence of the reflectiveness and excellence requisite in a justice, Miers' name probably would not have appeared in any of the 10,000 places on those lists.
Politically Inclined Heretic (on Will's commentary)--
Mr. Bush unsophisticated? Without any appreciation for nuance? Wow. Liberals have been saying that for years! And of course will take some pleasure in quoting from a well-respected conservative on this matter. We kind of knew it when he said Jesus was his favorite philosopher.Jesus may have been a good moralist but he was not a philosopher, and his decision to use the Bible as his favorite book to read underscored to us Mr. Bush's fundamental problem -- that he lacks the intellectual curiousity or rigor needed for the presidency. He has the decisiveness that Kerry lacked but the intellectual rigor, no, he just did not have that.
Judge Robert Bork--
BORK: ...I think it’s a disaster on every level.
CARLSON: Why? Explain the levels on which it’s a disaster.
BORK: Well, the first one is, that this is a woman who’s undoubtedly as wonderful a person as they say she is, but so far as anyone can tell she has no experience with constitutional law whatever. Now it’s a little late to develop a constitutional philosophy or begin to work it out when you’re on the court already. So that--I’m afraid she’s likely to be influenced by factors, such as personal sympathies and so forth, that she shouldn’t be influenced by. I don’t expect that she can be, as the president says, a great justice.
Charles Krauthammer--
If Harriet Miers were not a crony of the president of the United States, her nomination to the Supreme Court would be a joke, as it would have occurred to no one else to nominate her.
Michelle Malkin, on her blog--
It's not just that Miers has zero judicial experience. It's that she's so transparently a crony/"diversity" pick while so many other vastly more qualified and impressive candidates went to waste. If this is President Bush's bright idea to buck up his sagging popularity--among conservatives as well as the nation at large--one wonders whom he would have picked in rosier times. Shudder.
David Frum, in his NRO Diary--
This is no time for the president to indulge his loyalty to his friends. All this year, the president has been testing the limits of his support. Well we are at the limit now, and anything less than a superb choice for the O'Connor vacancy will overstep it.
Bill Kristol--
George W. Bush's nomination of White House Counsel Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court was at best an error, at worst a disaster.
David Brooks--
Of all the words written about Harriet Miers, none are more disturbing than the ones she wrote herself...
Of course, we have to make allowances for the fact that the first job of any association president is to not offend her members. Still, nothing excuses sentences like this:
"More and more, the intractable problems in our society have one answer: broad-based intolerance of unacceptable conditions and a commitment by many to fix problems."
Or this: "We must end collective acceptance of inappropriate conduct and increase education in professionalism."
Or this: "When consensus of diverse leadership can be achieved on issues of importance, the greatest impact can be achieved."
I don't know if by mere quotation I can fully convey the relentless march of vapid abstractions that mark Miers's prose. Nearly every idea is vague and depersonalized. Nearly every debatable point is elided.
Maureen Dowd--
W. is asking for a triple leap of faith. He has faith in Ms. Miers as his lawyer and as a woman who shares his faith. And we're expected to have faith in his faith and her faith, and her opinions that derive from her faith that could change the balance of the court and affect women's rights for the next generation.
In favor:
Kevin McCullough, conservative talk show host--
(via Politically Inclined Heretic)
I am now ready to fully support Miers. She stands for the protection of life -- born and pre-born...And she stands for the authority of the text of the Constitution," McCullough added. "In other words she is as strong a Constructionist as she is a Biblical believer. She treats both texts with respect that realizes that text holds an objective authoritative standard that should not 'grow' or 'change' over time.
Dick Cheney to Rush Limbaugh--
(via Politically Inclined Heretic)
I'm confident that she has a conservative judicial philosophy that you will be comfortable with, Rush. You'll be proud of Harriet's record. Trust me.
James Dobson--
The burden of this decision about this nominee weighs me down in ways that I don't recall experiencing before. Because if I make a mistake here, and others make a mistake, what we're talking about are babies. We're talking about millions of babies. If this nominee is the wrong person, I mean, for 20 or 30 years it will reverberate and will change this nation forever. I recognize the gravity of that, and I am saying to our listeners now what I have said to the Lord, and Shirley [Dobson's wife] and I prayed about this early this morning. I said, "...You know that what I feel now and what I think is right may be dead wrong. You know that I could get out of your will and do something to hurt the cause of Christ, and I would rather sacrifice my life than do that. And I think I know what you want me to say in regard to this nominee. I think I have your mind. But I'm not sure...
So I think maybe I ought to take the rest of the broadcast today, or at least a portion of it, to tell our listeners the rationale. Now, I can't reveal it all, because I do know things that, you know, I'm privy to that I can't describe because of confidentiality. And there are some things I can't go into...
She has been a believer in Jesus Christ since the late 1970s. I know the individual who led her to the Lord. I know the church that she goes to. I know it's very conservative church. I know that she is a tithe-paying member of that church. I know that she has deep convictions about things. And I have talked at length to people that know her and have known her for a long time. Some of them have been a close personal friend of hers for 25 years. And I trust these people because I know them. I know who they are, and I know their character, and I know what they stand for, and I know their love for the Lord. And they have said to me, "This is a good woman who will do the right thing when the chips are down. She will not be a disappointment, and you cannot go wrong by seeing her in one of the most powerful positions in this country" -- that being the justice who replaces Sandra Day O'Connor on the court.
Bush--
I’ve known her long enough to know she’s not going to change, that 20 years from now she will be the same person with the same judicial philosophy she has today...She’ll have more experience. She’ll have been a judge, but nevertheless the philosophy won’t change, and that’s important to me.
I know her character. She’s a woman of principle and deep conviction. She shares my philosophy that judges should strictly interpret the laws and the Constitution of the United States, and not legislate from the bench.
And this--
I've known Harriet for more than a decade. I know her heart, I know her character. I know that Harriet's mother is proud of her today, and I know her father would be proud of her, too.
In sum, I leave you with this:
Posted by onion slayer at October 13, 2005 05:00 PM
Comments
Mommy, I'm scared. Hold me.
Posted by: Hissy Cat at October 14, 2005 10:46 AM