Some Final Thoughts On Miers
My conservative brethren are relieved for the most part, and so am I. I am also deeply disappointed. There were elements on the right (not all her opponents, mind you, but I think we all know who they are) that behaved atrociously, and some of those same elements seem to think that they can throw the same fit with Bush’s next nominee if they don’t like him or her, either.
Don’t bet on it…the activists are always far outweighed by the rank-and-file, and I think another conservative revolt like we saw with Miers will simply marginalize those who engage in it. I don’t like the fact that Ms. Miers was forced to withdraw prior to a hearing. I think it is a very bad precedent. I don’t like the fact that Republicans tried to manufacture a false request for documentation to scuttle the nomination; I KNOW that is a very bad precedent, and it will no doubt come back to bite us.
In short, I’m more than a little disgusted with the behavior of many on the right. I haven’t felt this much bitterness towards fellow conservatives in quite some time, and I know I’m not the only one feeling this way. I guess what I’m saying is this: yes, Harriet Miers was a bad choice; yes, we’re better off with her nomination withdrawn…but the deplorable tactics cannot be tolerated a second time. I only speak for me, I’ve said so many times…but if George W. Bush’s next nominee is treated the way this one was, I’m not going to sit back quietly and appeal for moderation like I did this time.
What image does this sort of extremism send towards the undecided voters, the centrists, the middle, the people we need so desperately to win in 2008? This was not a victory, for anyone…it was the end to a disgraceful interlude, and the battle will be joined again shortly. Let’s hope this sorry spectacle doesn’t repeat itself again…I don’t think our party can afford a replay…
UPDATE 10/28 7:05 a.m.: More final thoughts from fatman, who reaches different conclusions than I, but makes some excellent points…
Umh, yeah, … so much for the “Every nominee deserves an up-or-down vote.” line. That went by the boards pretty quickly, when they saw a nominee they didn’t like.
I guess it’s like the “Perjury isn’t a real crime.” line we’ve been hearing lately (and, doubtless, will be hearing a lot more of in the weeks to come).
Good point about the message sent to the centrist voters. If we lose conservative voters in elections, it costs just one vote because they either don’t vote or vote third party. If we lose centrists, we in effect lose two votes because not only do they not vote Republican, but in all likelihood they vote Democrat.
I would say “ditto” to that post.
Here’s my concern: David Frum said “The system worked.” Then thanked those who supported him. This smacks of a campaign victory speech. And what system is this? Who voted for Frum?
Yup. The nomination was vertainly supportable, but the rancor it caused was unsustainable. Should any dolt on our side intentionally try to use that sort of emotion again we’ll deserve to lose. The Iraqis and others do not desrve that we lose though, so I’m praying.
Mark, what were these “deplorable tactics” that have so offended you? As far as I’m aware, lots of conservative pundits denounced it in their blogs and editorial columns, some started a letter-writing campaign, and I think I saw a TV ad about it. These all seem like perfectly fine responses. Was there more that I missed (ala the anti-McCain phone calls in 2000)?
Mark, I would hope that if the President nominates another candidate whose defenders can cite only her *heart* and her religious views as qualifications, while accusing her detractors of sexism, that the response would be the same.
fatman, I hear you, and Jojo, too – that’s why I’m taking pains to stress I’m not talking about opposition to Miers per se – that’s part of the give and take. I’m talking about the conservatives who immediately forgot John Roberts (that was so long ago, right? What have you done for me lately?) and decried Bush and his supporters as ‘betrayers’ of the conservative flame, the conservatives who forgot their high-falutin’ rhetoric about no litmus test (turns out there is one – a jurist who agrees as they do), about those conservatives who ridiculed Ms. Miers as a mental midget because maybe her writing wasn’t grammatically perfect (as if law clerks don’t write 95% of the opinions to begin with).
I still ask those who are popping the champagne corks – what was so bad about letting her have her hearing? Was the precedent of Republicans – Republicans, mind you – asking for confidential documents worth the three weeks that were saved?
AE, yes, the system worked for Frum – i.e., he got his desired outcome. Would the sytem have worked if Miers had been confirmed? I doubt Frum would see it that way…
Jacques, Miguel Estrada was denied an “up-or-down” vote because a minority in the Senate chose to use a procedural rule to block that vote. Harriet Miers chose to withdraw her nomination because she WOULD have gotten a vote. A vote that increasingly seemed likely to be “no”.
That you seem unable to tell the difference, or unwilling to acknowledge the difference, says far more about you than it does about those who opposed Miers.
fatman, you mention the charges of sexism against those who opposed Miers – that’s a good point. I should hasten to say that many supporters of Miers engaged in pretty low behavior, as well. Not a good show for our team, no matter what side of the divide you found yourself on…
Mark, if I may, one last comment on this whole sorry mess:
http://htfdidthishappen.blogspot.com/2005/10/last-word-on-miers.html
I’m with fatman on this. Miers would have gotten her vote and, more importantly, her hearing. Then the whole world would have known what a joke she was. Maybe I’m being a snob, but her problem wasn’t just that her writing wasn’t perfect; it was that her writing was barely coherent. It looks like she isn’t just bad at expressing herself – she’s bad at having ideas. David Brooks’ column remains one of my favorites from the whole debacle.
If we get another nominee like Miers – and we won’t; of that I’m sure – I can only hope that people like Frum will be there to remind the President that the Supreme Court isn’t a family Christmas party.
As for all this talk of betrayal of the conservative movement… Wouldn’t the President have had to be a part of the movement before he could betray it? At no point in his administration has Bush looked like a conservative on anything other than a handful of inconsequential social issues (oh noes! the gayz r gtng marrd! DOOM!). If he gives us Lutting or McConnell, it’ll be the first conservative thing he’s ever done.
I’ll be really interested to see how this plays out in the long term — not in terms of electoral politics, but in terms of how we see future SCOTUS nominees. (In the sense of the way Souter’s appointment or Bork’s hearings did…)
I suspect GWB will get Miers onto an appeals court before he’s out. Ten years from now, with Miers writing extremely conservative opinions, there will surely be those on the right desperately fantasizing about what she would have been like on the Court and comparing her to whoever the eventual nominee turns out to be. There’s going to be a bunch of anger from some parts of the GOP’s big tent, and it will be interesting to see how it’s directed and how that plays out.