« Let Them Gloat | Main | King Kong--King Dud? »
October 27, 2005
Miers Roundup
Kitty: I know many feel as though the conservatives won, and maybe we have, but we also lost something in the process, too. I was neither for nor against Harriet Miers because I didn't know her. I was appalled by the knee-jerk reaction by the conservatives, which did nothing for Bush and smeared Miers in the process. Their reaction was instant and severe even though they knew relatively nothing about her, and it fed into the ongoing left-wing anti-Bush feeding frenzy. Pam said it best:
You know, all of those Republicans and conservatives who declare that a nominee should be afforded the dignity of a straight up-or-down Senate vote after a timely confirmation hearing really need to check their double standards list. I'm just disgusted with the whole affair.
Pat: I hope that now the Miers nomination has been scuttled that we Republicans can "all just get along". We also need to be prepared for the onslaught on the new nominee, who will be blasted by the Democrats and their friends in the media as a sell-out to the "extremist wing" of the party. The Democrats are already sowing the seeds for this with their comments about how religious fundamentalists were responsible for the uprising. This is completely untrue; in fact many Christian Conservatives were among Miers' most enthusiastic backers, while largely secular conservatives like NRO and George Will were opposed. But of course that something is untrue will not prevent them from saying it.
Posted by Aaron at October 27, 2005 01:06 PM
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.lifelikepundits.com/cgi-bin/mt3/mt-tb.cgi/1672
Comments
Many christian conservatives were also amoung her biggest detracters. The problem with a candidate with no time on the bench and no published work is that you have to guess about who they are. Not all CCs guessed the same.
But that doesn't matter because Bush has no political or religious litmus test for SCOTUS nominees, right?
Posted by: IaintBacchus at October 27, 2005 06:04 PM
Iaint, it's possible that some CC's were knocking her, but the folks leading the charge were NRO's Corner and George Will.
And of course there's no litmus test, just as there won't be if the Democrats get back in. ;)
Posted by: Pat Curley at October 27, 2005 08:31 PM
With regard to Miers, I have to say that I think this is a dark day for blogsphere. Miers may not have been the best choice but we will never know for sure. Because of the adverse publicity, much of it from bloggers, she was denied her right to a hearing. In this case, blogsphere was not too different from the major media when they have tried, convicted and executed individuals with negative news.
Posted by: docdave at October 27, 2005 09:15 PM
She had a "right" to a hearing?
Posted by: tj at October 27, 2005 11:47 PM
TJ, that's what the Right used to stand for. Now of course, that principle's thrown to the wind.
Posted by: Pat Curley at October 28, 2005 01:44 AM
Pat, that's a crock. The right never stood for any such thing. That's just the excuse they were finding convenient to use for the nuclear option. And they just proved it this last week.
Posted by: IaintBacchus at October 28, 2005 09:59 AM
THIS IS DRIVING ME INSANE!!! She was not fillibustered. There is no comparison or application to the nuclear option or the principle of an up or down vote. Bork wasn't even filibustered.
She withdrew her nomination.
Posted by: Aaron Matthew Arnwine at October 28, 2005 10:24 AM
No, she wasn't filibustered. But that wasn't the point. The point was that the right's supposed high minded principle that every nominee deserves an up or down vote was nothing more or less than a political posture. Orrin Hatch didn't believe that all through the '90s when he stranded over 200 of Clintons nominees in commitee, and nobody on the right believed in it last week while they were piling on Miers.
The right doesn't HAVE any principles. All it has is whatever it's convient to say to get what they want at the time. You guys are not one bit more moral or ethical than the left. You're just one hell of a site more hipocrytical about what you say and do in public.
Posted by: IaintBacchus at October 28, 2005 10:58 AM
The right wing in the media - especially Ann Coulter who made a completely inappropriate jab at Ms. Miers (a woman without whom it's possible Ms. Coulter would not have been able to go to law school since Ms. Miers was a pioneer)- she should have had the opportunity to state her case for her qualifications BEFORE everybody started bleating and bloviating. Then if she wasn't qualified, of course we would have the right to say so - but first Ms. Miers SHOULD HAVE BEEN given an opportunity to be heard.
Posted by: Gayle Miller at October 28, 2005 03:49 PM
The right wing in the media - especially Ann Coulter who made a completely inappropriate jab at Ms. Miers (a woman without whom it's possible Ms. Coulter would not have been able to go to law school since Ms. Miers was a pioneer)- she should have had the opportunity to state her case for her qualifications BEFORE everybody started bleating and bloviating. Then if she wasn't qualified, of course we would have the right to say so - but first Ms. Miers SHOULD HAVE BEEN given an opportunity to be heard.
Posted by: Gayle Miller at October 28, 2005 04:20 PM
Thanks for that one, Gayle. "Should have been" is a much better choice of words than "her right".
Posted by: tj at October 28, 2005 05:10 PM