I Guess This Is Surprise #2
I suppose this is news:
President Bush’s Supreme Court nominee, Harriet E. Miers, pledged support in 1989 for a constitutional amendment that would ban abortions except when necessary to save the life of the woman.
Ms. Miers expressed her support for such an amendment in an April 1989 survey sent out by Texans United for Life. The disclosure virtually guarantees that Ms. Miers will be questioned heavily during hearings before the Senate Judiciary Committee on abortion rights and whether she can separate her personal views from legal issues.
I frankly don’t find this in the least surprising, and I doubt anyone else does, either.
In 1989 Miers expressed her support for a political approach to the issue of abortion. The Supreme Court is a judicial body and Miers is on record, according to Brit Hume on Fox tonight, in support of respecting judicial precedent. The two points-of-view – support for a constitutional amendment restricting abortion and support for the precedent of Roe v. Wade (the confluence of which will be described as conflicting by Miers’ oppoents) – are not in conflict and are unrelated and consistent (with he long held positions).
too many steves, exactly – and the other thing is, really, the way this is being pumped as a big revelation – the big revelation would have been if she was on the record with the opposite view. That a Republican would be pro-life is no more surprising than a Democrat being pro-choice. This is not news, it’s grasping at straws…