The content on this webpage contains paid/affiliate links. When you click on any of our affiliate link, we/I may get a small compensation at no cost to you. See our affiliate disclosure for more info -----------------------
Last updated on July 26th, 2017 at 01:55 pm
Miers withdrawing, according to reports. More soon.
(Via AnkleBitingPundits)
UPDATE. The withdrawal letter.
UPDATE II. Bush’s response.
UPDATE III. Associated Press:
Under withering attack from conservatives, President Bush ended his push to put loyalist Harriet Miers on the Supreme Court Thursday and promised a quick replacement. Democrats accused him of bowing to the “radical right wing of the Republican Party.”
UPDATE IV. Constant Miers reaction updates are promised at Decision08.
Cites desire to protect executive privilege. (Chicago Tribune).
Harriet Miers was (is) very smart and very tough. Her resume is genuinely impressive. But appointing her to SCOTUS would have been like an Australian PM appointing a barrister (from his own department) to the High Court.
I think W saw in Miers a narrative of personal achievement that required a grandiose American apotheosis. Billy Graham did it for him and he wanted to do it for Harriet. Admirable but wrongheaded.
Don’t misunderestimate Bush. Look: As Rush Limbaugh said, you wouldn’t want to go to war with the Senate Republicans as your army. Only France surrenders faster. OK, fine: Now the base is fired up, so I’ll bet a nickel he nominates a good mouthbreathing knuckledragging conservative like me. Bring it on!
Posted by Monroe Doctrine on 10/27 at 09:41 AM • permalink
All I have to say is – bring on Janice Rogers Brown.
Posted by ausdiplomad on 10/27 at 10:39 AM • permalink
Apropos Monroe Doctrine’s comment, I’m stunned that Glenn Reynolds hasn’t yet called the whole Miers nomination Dubya’s newest rope-a-dope maneuver on gullible Democrats.
I don’t think that it was planned that way from the start (Bush’s praise of his longtime confidante seems genuine), but once the Republican base started its outcry over the nomination, you can bet they were thinking about a way to use it to their advantage. Janice Rogers Brown as the new nominee would be quite alright with me.
As Rush Limbaugh said, you wouldn’t want to go to war with the Senate Republicans as your army. Only France surrenders faster.
It amazes me that the Democrats still act like the party in power, and the Republicans still act like the party out of power. It’s going on 10 years now, guys – grow some balls.
Miss Miers is a very nice lady who was clearly out of her depth. The questionnaire that she returned to the Senate Judiciary Committee was rife with errors both grammatical and conceptual.
I’m with ausdiplomad: Bring on Janice Rogers Brown and watch the lefties on the Committee squirm as they try to “Bork” an African-American lady – supremely qualified (no pun intended) – who worked her way from abject poverty to the top of her profession.
All I wanted is to not repeat the fiasco that was the selection of David Souter by George HW Bush. I knew he’d turn into another William Brennan wannabe. And although he mimics more of a Harry Blackmun, he’s still a moonbatty liberal.
Posted by wronwright on 10/27 at 02:19 PM • permalink
I nominate Robert Bork . . . it’s Bork time!
Posted by Oafish and Infantile on 10/27 at 04:21 PM • permalink
The unseemly behaviour by some of the Republican fringe has done the unthinkable—reminded me why I used to vote Left. I remembered that not everyone in the parties of the right is a true conservative—morally conservative, family oriented, principled but where possible consensual, friend of small business and the ordinary guy, sensibly non-ideological etc.
There is also a sizable and distasteful minority of old money blue bloods, ivory tower elitists, haughty old tories, big-el Libertarians (“I hate those guys”), cynical power junkies, and other offensive riff raff who know exactly how to to lose elections would love another chance to prove it.
These guys are death to the conservative movement (as evidenced by the UK Conservative party and the Liberals here in Victoria). We need to peel off right-thinking centrists from the Leftist parties so we can evict this rabble to the lunatic fringe. (In fact evicting some of these unsavoury types would probably immediately entice right-thinking centrists from the Left).
Actually, Bush should now nominate a gay single-parent womyn of color with a tenured law chair at UC Berkeley, just to show The National Review and Bill Kristol that he can.
Posted by richard mcenroe on 10/27 at 06:38 PM • permalink
So let’s see what this costs the conservative movment, next nomination:
When the Democrats demand documents, we can’t object, because so did bloggers, pundits and politicians on the right.
When the Democrats demand firm answers to litmus test questions, we can’t object, because so did we.
When the Democrats make the nominee’s religious beliefs an issue, we can’t object, because so did bloggers, pundits and politicians on the right.
When the Democrats run anonymously-funded attack ads, we can’t complain, because so did bloggers, pundits and politicians on the right.
Seems like a pretty high price to pay so The Corner could high-five each other and a bunch of middle-aged white guys in bow-ties could take charge of the invitations list. Guess that’s why I ain’t a pundit.
Posted by richard mcenroe on 10/27 at 07:49 PM • permalink
Oh please, not the “we must never do anything that can possibly be used against us by the political opponent later” argument. That’s exactly the kind of paranoia that has doomed the Left to stasis and cult-like behaviour. Weren’t we the guys who are about doing the right thing rather than the politically expedient thing?
(Whether killing off the Miers nomination was in fact the right thing to do is a different question of course. IMHO, it was, for the various reasons mentioned by others above.)
#18 RM I think you will find that it was the White House that made Ms Meirs’ religous beliefs an issue. With all that ‘trust us she is an evangelical’ business.
Posted by Just Another Bloody Lawyer on 10/27 at 09:03 PM • permalink
JamesP, all members of the Republican Party are radicals—didn’t you get that memo from Howard Dean?
Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 10/28 at 12:42 AM • permalink
Yeah, kip, peel off all of those apostates who aren’t “true” conservatives (by your definition) and watch what remains in the GOP just reel in those election victories. Uh-huh.
I’m rather baffled by your definition, too:
“morally conservative”
What, you can’t be a Republican if you’re not a virgin when you marry?
“family oriented”
As opposed to the “strip parents of custody and ship the brats to an orphanage” wing of the GOP?
“principled but where possible consensual”
Unlike the “true conservatives” who don’t have any litmus tests I can think of offhand, nope, not a one.
“friend of small business and the ordinary guy”
Unlike the statist big-gummint libertarians.
“sensibly non-ideological”
..while wanting to banish the apostates who aren’t “true conservatives”.
You’re all over the map, kip.
God, you’re an a-hole, kip. I’m not wasting any more time on your venomous ass. And incidentally, your self-professed Christianity needs some work.
BTW, I just found out you’re Australian, so any debate about the nature of conservatism is moot, because Australian and American conservatism are apparently two different animals.
Oh, and fuck you.
We need to peel off right-thinking centrists from the Leftist parties so we can evict this rabble to the lunatic fringe.
Actually, you’d be evicting guys like Dave and me to the lunatic centre, and the people you’re courting as a replacement tend to share remarkably many characteristics with us – except that they’re more liberal-leaning, so I fail to see the resulting improvement to the conservative cause. In other words, I think you’re sadly deluded about the number of potential “true conservative” voters who don’t already vote conservative for whatever reason.
But then, you seem to be kind of a big-government guy on any subject other than the economy, so I can see why you’d get along better with the liberals than with us. And yeah, as Dave pointed out already…you and “sensibly non-ideological”, that’s just a hilarious juxtaposition. Goes to show that lefties aren’t the only people lacking self-awareness, after all.
not everyone in the parties of the right is a true conservative—morally conservative, family oriented, principled but where possible consensual, friend of small business and the ordinary guy, sensibly non-ideological etc.
There is also a sizable and distasteful minority of old money blue bloods, ivory tower elitists, haughty old tories, big-el Libertarians (“I hate those guys”), cynical power junkies, and other offensive riff raff who know exactly how to to lose elections would love another chance to prove it.
These guys are death to the conservative movement … We need to peel off right-thinking centrists from the Leftist parties so we can evict this rabble to the lunatic fringe. (In fact evicting some of these unsavoury types would probably immediately entice right-thinking centrists from the Left).“Vee must purge ze ranks uff ze ideologically impure, und zen ve must set about buildink our electiff majority.”
Posted by Stoop Davy Dave on 10/28 at 01:10 PM • permalink
I am beginning to think that kip’s mother was scared by a libertarian when she was pregnant with kip. Either that or the poor boy just keeps getting bitch slapped by libertarians every time he opens his trap.
Posted by Just Another Bloody Lawyer on 10/28 at 05:43 PM • permalink
Yeah, I can see why certain “true conservatives” are upset Miers didn’t get her shot. I mean, look at her conservative bona fides:
1) Donated to an Al Gore campaign
2) Supports affirmative-action quotas
3) Endorsed by Harry freakin’ Ried.Wow, talk about rock-ribbed. So, why are these folks so pissed? Because the Supreme Court won’t be getting a top-notch legal mind? Because she’s a renowned constitutional scholar?
Nope – as far as I can tell, they’re pissed because they’ve lost someone who got the thumb’s-up from James Dobson. Period. Unqualified? Hey, only “elitists” have a problem with that. Not a conservative? Relax, she is, really, cross my heart. Barry Goldwater, father of modern American conservatism – not a conservative. William F. Buckley’s National Review, the lone island of conservative thought in a liberal media ocean for decades – not conservative. Charles Krauthammer and George Will, the two leading syndicated conservative columnists in America – not conservative. But Harriet, she’s a “true conservative” (wink wink), because we’ve redefined the word and Goldwater and Buckley and Krauthammer and the rest can get the hell out of the tent and make room for Dobson and crew. If it walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then I’m going to redefine duck so that I’m a “true duck” and it’s a “false duck”.
Yeah, right. In the words of Howie Carr – “Screw!”
The good ol’ BBC also reports that Iran’s new president’s radical comments re Israel are really just local posturing and not to be worried about. What a load of crap!