10.25.2005

On Bush and Miers

I have held on as long as I could, waiting, hoping to let the hearings bear out the evidence needed to justify the president's pick.

But, now I'm being asked by various parties to state my view on Miers. And, if I had to make a decision based on what I know right now, I would have to say that I oppose the Miers nomination.

I hate to say it because I trust our president. But, this is not simply about trust or about him. At the end of the day, it is the president who has the authority to choose his candidate. That is his constitutional right. No debate about that. The debate in my mind has more to do with whether he followed wise counsel.

I do not agree with those who, like Coulter, Malkin and some over at National Review Online who are lambasting the president for his pick, with a virtual disregard for his record and his commitment to an originalist judicial philosophy, one that applies the constitution as it is rather than a "loose construction," which feels free to reinterpret and add to the constitution, even if it means elevating international law to the level of the US Constitution.

On the other side, Peggy Noonan and John Fund, among many others, are disappointed and believe that the President missed an opportunity. This is what I believe. I've said before that so many of us went to the polls, we even flew to battleground states to in order to elect the president who would select the strict constructionist judicial nominees.

It didn't have to be this complicated. We didn't go to the polls to ensure a female justice. We didn't go to the polls to ensure a born-again justice. We didn't go to the polls to ensure a friend of the president as justice. We went to the polls to ensure a justice who would uphold the constitution. That's it.

Early reports of her questionnaire and her interviews are not good. If the president and his advisors wanted to go with a no-name without a paper trail, they should have gone with a solid pick, one who would blow any very well qualified justice out of the water.

Time will tell. The hearings begin on November 7. We will not have to wait very long to find out exactly what she's made of. I promise to come out in full support of her Miers nomination if she proves us wrong. I also hope that if she does flop, that those who have been her greatest supporters--like Jay Sekulow and Hugh Hewitt--would retract their support.

This is all-or-nothing. There's much more at stake than the momentary "peace" of those in the conservative movement. Our nation's political and cultural future is at stake.

15 Comments:

At 10/25/2005 05:58:00 AM, Anonymous aj4runner said...

'Truth Laid Bear' has an intersting poll going for bloggers regarding the Miers nomination: Go here for the current results:

http://www.truthlaidbear.com/miers.php

There is a link at the very top you can click on to participate.

 
At 10/25/2005 06:19:00 AM, Anonymous sleep-deprived said...

I was looking forward to Bush putting forward another slam-dunk with his nominee. Someone who, like Roberts, was so well qualified the opposition would have no choice but to confirm, or flounder in their attempt to oppose. I really enjoyed listening to Roberts during the confirmation hearings...how refreshing to hear someone so clearly qualified, intelligent, well spoken. Why wouldn't Bush do the same with his second pick?

As a woman, I find it patronizing that the seat HAS to be filled by a woman. I want it filled by the most qualified person...if that happens to be a woman, so be it. Even so, if Bush is set on nominating a woman surely there is a Roberts-equivalent (or more qualified), female candidate out there.

What a missed opportunity for the President to show the strength of his decision-making, and to show the world another person of EXCELLENCE.

 
At 10/25/2005 06:25:00 AM, Blogger luvbeingamom said...

Like you, Lores, I wanted to believe and trust President Bush and get behind him on this, but I find myself just as disturbed as you. My original thought was that all criticism coming from the Republican Party was just a "head fake" for the Democrats, but now I'm beginning to worry. What do you think about the support and comments by James Dobson that she was solid?

 
At 10/25/2005 08:37:00 AM, Blogger Cabe said...

I lost faith in my President.

The man doesn't veto a dang thing. He spends money like drunken sailors swear, and has gone out of his way to appease liberals when he knew dang well they wouldn't care. Bush has spent more on poverty entitlements than any other President, but does he get thanks from the minority community? No, ofcourse not!
Stop Appeasing already, act like a Conservative!

Now with this Socialist Nomination I am fed up with him. He's worse than his father. We need a Mitt Romney or a Newt Gingrich to balance the budget, and act responsible in all things.

I go to a liberal school everyday, and I have to stand up for Conservative values frequently! Bush isn't making it easy for me at all!

 
At 10/26/2005 12:53:00 AM, Anonymous V. Schroeder said...

The campaign or "discussion" on Miers that has taken place I think will make it impossible for her to get "fair" confirmation hearings. And I think--conservatives are "shooting themselves in the foot". As Truman liked to say "the buck stops there" (at the presidency) everyone else gets 2 cents and no more, some of us should probably get change. I'd better stop before I get a "mixed metaphor" alert.

 
At 10/26/2005 01:34:00 AM, Blogger Cabe said...

Just watching Hannity and Colmes...

Maurice Hinchey got his arse handed to him by Sean Hannity. It was utterly hilarious!

 
At 10/26/2005 01:37:00 AM, Blogger The Floating Dome said...

Yes, I support the President.
Yes, I voted for him.
Yes, I think it is his choice to nominate a SCOTUS justice.
Yes, I think that means we need to trust him on his choice.

That being said.
Trust. But. Verify.

Lores, great point on the merits of the argument. "We went to the polls to ensure a justice who would uphold the constitution." Would it be nice to have a woman to add Just a Woman's perspective to issues before the court?

Yes. But, I repeat "We went to the polls to ensure a justice who would uphold the constitution."

Would it be nice to have a confirmed Christian on the bench to guide decisions from a godly perspective?

Yes. But... ditto.

My only disappointment is her age.
Oh, come on! Age discrimination? No. But, when I see a very qualified (and female) Janice Rogers Brown at 56, I do tend to think - "there's a woman who may have a full presidential term of life more in her than Miers."

Shallow? Could be. But, John Cornyn's 2 full presidential terms younger. Gonzales is 3 terms younger...
Now, I'm no expert on this, I don't even know if JRB or Gonzales could be considered, but the point I'm aiming at is this:
All other things being equal, wouldn't it be nice for Mr. Bush to leave a legacy that lasts a bit longer?

Yes. But, "We went to the polls to ensure a justice who would uphold the constitution." How about one that keeps going, and going, and going, and upholds the constitution. The President has an opportunity, a decision to steward. But, perhaps her opinion, experience, and response to the confirmation hearings will show us something that trumps her gender, age, race, and faith. Talent, skill, and ability...
Then, if she's a noGo, I'll beat down the doors of my elected officials to make sure they beat her down with a "no" vote, yada yada...
I also agree that if she Wow's them, I'll recant my opposition (which actually has nothing to do with the former descriptors, but the latter).
I am holding out for the hearings. I just don't know that we have enough info. I need to understand the process better, as well. It's been a long time since my 12th grade government class.

I could also be a complete idiot.

 
At 10/26/2005 01:43:00 AM, Anonymous sleep-deprived said...

mission command - I couldn't agree more about the age issue! I guess in my current sleep-deprived state I completely forgot to add my two-cents worth about it! Glad you brought it up.

 
At 10/26/2005 02:17:00 AM, Blogger Mark Daniels said...

Hewitt, for one, has said that if the hearings demonstrate that Miers should not serve on the Court, he will say so publicly.

God bless!

Mark Daniels

 
At 10/26/2005 04:08:00 AM, Blogger Layman said...

I am of much the same sentiment, Lores. I was withholding judgment, but most (not all) of what I have learned has been discouraging. I am more willing to wait for the hearings, but would not shed a tear if she was withdrawn or pulled herself out. There are so many better qualified candidates.

I will say that I think Hugh has defended Meiers beyond his ability to make persuasive arguments. It's painful to listen to his show anymore, because its mostly about Meiers most of the time with guest after guest explaining to Hugh why he is wrong. I admire his bravery in taking on the leading opponents of Meirs, but he's deluding himself in thinking he's winning these arguments.

 
At 10/26/2005 05:35:00 AM, Blogger Goat said...

Well said Lores and can say I reide in the same camp as you do on this, optimistically pessimistic

 
At 10/26/2005 05:49:00 AM, Anonymous aj4runner said...

I also support President Bush and think he's done an excellent job except for immigration reform and signing overspending bills being passed by Congress. He has already made excellent nominations to the lower courts and one SCOTUS nomination.

That said I have to stay with my original thoughts on this nomination. Harriet Miers would be an a-okay nominee for a lower court appointment, but not for an extremely very very very rare nomination to the Supreme Court.

This is the equivalent of nominating someone with only little league, high school and maybe some college baseball experience to the Major League Baseball Hall of Fame.

There are Hall-of-Fame caliber woman nominees who are well qualified and deserving of a lifetime appointment to the Supreme Court ... Janice Rogers-Brown, Edith Jones, Priscilla Owen, etc., etc., etc.

By the way I'm glad President Bush did select a woman to help balance out the court. In the case he made the wrong selection, ... IMHO.

 
At 10/26/2005 05:05:00 PM, Blogger Mark said...

Lores, I have been in support of Miers since a few days following her nomination, but now I am having second thoughts.

Of course, it won't matter if she doesn't get comfirmed. I guess that's the reason the system is set up the way it is.

Time will tell.

 
At 10/26/2005 05:12:00 PM, Blogger Layman said...

I thought that I should add that I think the anti-Meir forces have embarassed themselves on some fronts to with some of their arguments. I think Hewitt has overreached in supporting her but some on the Corner have overreached in attacking her.

 
At 10/26/2005 09:50:00 PM, Anonymous aj4runner said...

layman:

Ann Coulter has been the worst. In her radio interview on the Mike Rosen show here in Denver she called for the impeachment of President Bush over the nomination... and she wasn't kidding. Even mentioned calling her new book "Impeach Bush". Interview link here so you can hear it for yourself:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1496957/posts

 

Post a Comment

<< Home