Comments on: Some Final Thoughts On Miers

By: Clint

Clint — Sun, 30 Oct 2005 17:32:10 +0000

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.

By: Ryan Bonneville

Ryan Bonneville — Sat, 29 Oct 2005 01:59:35 +0000

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.

By: fatman

fatman — Fri, 28 Oct 2005 08:12:26 +0000

Mark, if I may, one last comment on this whole sorry mess:

http://htfdidthishappen.blogspot.com/2005/10/last-word-on-miers.html

By: Mark

Mark — Fri, 28 Oct 2005 04:05:46 +0000

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…

By: fatman

fatman — Fri, 28 Oct 2005 03:57:35 +0000

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.

By: Mark

Mark — Fri, 28 Oct 2005 03:33:45 +0000

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…

By: Mark

Mark — Fri, 28 Oct 2005 03:30:37 +0000

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?

By: fatman

fatman — Fri, 28 Oct 2005 03:20:22 +0000

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.

By: Jojo

Jojo — Fri, 28 Oct 2005 03:00:27 +0000

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)?

By: Honza Prchal

Honza Prchal — Fri, 28 Oct 2005 02:30:50 +0000

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.