Cassandra at Villainous Company takes on those Miers whiners. Quite well, in fact. And she uses bell curves and other stat thingies. What's not to like? A long post, but well worth reading.

Posted by: Gary at 03:49 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 39 words, total size 1 kb.

Though the veins on Mark Levin's forehead are still throbbing incessantly, he acknowledges the role that the John McCain's "Gang of 14" may have played in the Miers nomination by keeping the judicial filibuster tactic alive. more...

Posted by: Gary at 10:43 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 445 words, total size 3 kb.

Wow. You want hostility? I'll give you hostility. Beth at My Vast Right Wing Conspiracy has had it up to here with George Will. And she has a few choice words for those shrieking Conservatives throwing hissy-fits over the Miers nomination.

Not for the faint-hearted or profanity-averse. But an excellent post. When folks on the Right say "we" elected George W. Bush, they need to remember that 62 million Americans voted for him and that number represents a very diverse group.

Posted by: Gary at 03:07 PM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 93 words, total size 1 kb.

1 Nonsense. It was almost DeNiro-esque. Sometimes you just gotta say it like you feel it.

Posted by: Gary at October 06, 2005 04:52 PM (PLHs9)

2 Good rant, though the author is full of crap. If Geoge Will isn't part of the base, the author sure isn't. I'm just kind of sick of emotion driven crap. There's enough from liberals. I really dislike it from the right.

Posted by: rightwingprof at October 07, 2005 09:57 AM (hj1Wx)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

From James Lileks, on the Conservative punditry:

TheyÂ’re never happy nowadays. These were the people who caught a whiff of Souterism in John RobertÂ’s nomination, and wouldnÂ’t be happy unless a nominee announced his intention to back Souter into a corner in the cloakroom and give him a turbo-wedgie every day.

Hat Tip to Hugh Hewitt

Posted by: Gary at 11:21 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 69 words, total size 1 kb.

It's been several days since the President nominated Harriet Miers for the Supreme Court and many Conservatives are still fuming. George Will's op-ed yesterday, while well argued, was a shot across the White House's bow that may have made the situation worse by handing Democrats plenty of non-ideological arguments that they can use during her confirmation hearings.

The emotion being felt on the Right is understandable, but as we move forward I think we need to step back a bit and do some serious reflection over this matter. There are a lot of things about Miers that we do not know, true. But there are many things about this whole process that we also do not know. more...

Posted by: Gary at 08:28 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 801 words, total size 5 kb.

One of the biggest gripes I've been reading around the Conservative Blogosphere the last couple of days is about the praise that Sen. Minority Leader Harry Reid has been heaping on Harriet Miers. The rationale seems to be "Look! If Reid likes her, Bush really looks like a fool!" Frankly, a lot of folks on the Right would much rather see Reid lose his shit on the Senate floor over a nomination.

Well, guess what people? Reid knows this all to well and he's playing it to the hilt. He gushed even more about Miers yesterday. I'm sure his hope is that if he can goad the Right into doing his job for him, by discrediting her, his battle is half won. Hell, maybe the Republican Senators can make better arguments against her than Democrats can.

Who cares if Reid says he "likes her"? He said he "liked" John Roberts only minutes before he voted against him. All Reid is doing is setting Miers up so he can later say, "Gee, I did like Harriet Miers until it become clear to me that she [fill in the complaint here]. It's such a shame I can no longer support her nomination."

This is a game that Harry Reid and the Democrats are starting to figure out how to play. Should we really be helping him? The die is cast. Miers is the nominee and that's not going to change. It seems foolish to be ripping her this early in the process. Vent if you will, but remember that what you say can and will be used against her during the hearings.

Posted by: Gary at 11:13 AM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 276 words, total size 2 kb.

Texas Senator John Cornyn has on op-ed in OpinionJournal.com this morning in support of Miers. He brings up several aspects of her resume that have been thus far overlooked.

And he makes an interesting point that reinforces what folks like "the Great One" Mark Levin have been saying recently about the courts in general and SCOTUS in particular (see Levin's excellent book "Men In Black"):

It is true that she was not educated at East Coast universities and has not spent her entire career inside the Beltway. This, again, is a plus in my book, not a minus. Anyone who has followed the Supreme Court in recent years knows that what the institution needs most is a dose of life beyond Washington. Last year, the court permitted a public display of the Ten Commandments in Texas, but not in Kentucky. It took nine justices on the court 10 different opinions to explain why this was so. The court is dangerously out of touch with America. Ms. Miers will help bring it back down to earth.

UPDATE: 10:20am
Tony Blankely is reluctantly signing on.

As in life, so in politics, if one seeks disappointment one will surely find it. And conservatives have not had to look hard this week to find the gloom. But it is the disappointment of an unrequited ardor, of a not yet fully consummated passion. Such youthful vigor inevitably finds its satisfaction.

Consider, in the alternative, the deeper disappointment that liberals contemplate in this dreary autumn of their aspirations.

The last remaining champions of their principles sit aged and infirm on the high bench -- their former brilliance now brittle and susceptible to being chiseled and crumbled by even the most modest conservative laborers.

Victory may not be heroic, but it will be ours.

Posted by: Gary at 09:00 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 334 words, total size 2 kb.

Drudge links this 1991 National Review article that actually refers to Clarence Thomas as "Souteresque". WTF?

Posted by: Gary at 09:48 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 20 words, total size 1 kb.

Are conservatives not seeing the forest, here? Pat Ruffini lays it out the way he sees it:

Some would prefer a nominee in a more esoteric, elitist, or eccentric mold, with the penmanship of a Scalia. Harriet Miers will not be the flashiest Justice – but nor will she make leaps of logic that sometimes lead her in unconservative and unpredictable directions (see McConnell on polygamy, or Scalia on pornography). This is not the time to act like preening Ivory Tower elitists, but to call Harry Reid's bluff. Miers will cast the votes that O'Connor wouldn't. And that's all that matters.

Posted by: Gary at 08:49 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 907 words, total size 6 kb.

Taking what Dick Cheney told Rush Limbaugh today ("Trust Us") along with the myriad of opinion on this nomination and mixing it in with what I have observed of Bush over the last five years, I have a whacky theory here.

Bush knows Harriet Miers as well as anyone. She was his personal attorney. Through their friendship (and under the protection of the Attorney-Client privilege) I would imagine that they've discussed every political issue under the sun as it relates to the judiciary.

She has no paper trail. Conservatives are losing their minds. Liberals are breathing a sigh of relief.

What if...

Harriet Miers gets confirmed without having to reveal any opinion on any particular case - thanks to Roberts. Then, once on the bench for the rest of her life, she goes full Right-Wing Ninja?

Just a thought. This White House doesn't do anything without considering the long-term implications. Five years from now, will Miers be the new "darling" of Conservatives on the Supreme Court, surpassing even Scalia and Thomas?

Hey, it's the only thing that makes sense. It's so...Rovian!

Posted by: Gary at 04:20 PM | Comments (6) | Add Comment
Post contains 193 words, total size 1 kb.

1 Ex-Donkey, thank you, this is the first rational post on the subject I have read today. When has Bush ever really let down his conservative base? Is there any real reason to think he would do it now? He isn't stupid and I am sure he knows what her opinions are on a range of important subjects. He would not appoint someone who he disagrees with. Its time for the right to show some faith in Bush. Just because he didn't pick someone who is combative or going to cause a fight does not mean that he "chose from a position of weakness." The word here is "stategery".

Posted by: Paul at October 03, 2005 05:15 PM (97/fu)

2 You are getting trackback for this one!

Posted by: Ryan S. at October 03, 2005 05:42 PM (HAY6t)

3 Or, what if she's the red herring? A Karl Rove ruse? Put up to be struck down so an even more right wing judge can be nominated and Repubs can say...you can't keep striking down our nominees...

Posted by: marybishop at October 03, 2005 07:32 PM (I8s+f)

4 No. If she's "struck down" it'll be because Republicans voted against her. Democrats don't have the power to vote her down. There are only 44 of them. Try again.

Posted by: Gary at October 03, 2005 08:26 PM (RNJ7+)

5 The saddest thing I have read in a long time are all of the comments that suggest all these ulterior motives. What a sad place we find ourselves in.

Posted by: Jack at October 04, 2005 01:58 AM (xkBQr)

6 In order for our stealth conservative to get through without the battle so many were looking forward to, we conservative bloggers need to keep acting outraged and let down. :wink: I was a bit agitated yesterday, but feel better today about the nomination pick. Unlikely the other past picks by conservatives, like a Souter, this President personally knows Miers. It might be a weakness of his; but it could also be a strength, if he accurately assessed the character of Miers.

Posted by: Wordsmith from Nantucket at October 04, 2005 10:07 AM (nrGCx)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Wow. This one seems to be melting down fast. It's becoming more and more apparent that Miers may be unacceptable to enough Conservatives as to lead to a rejection in the Senate. The comparisons to LBJ's nomination of Abe Fortas are flying fast and furious.

Michelle Malkin has the best round-up and Memeorandum has many, many links.

It's starting to look to these eyes that this was a tremendous political blunder if for no other reason than the position this will put GOP Senators in. After lambasting Democrats for voting against Roberts on purely ideological grounds, many Republicans in the Senate will look like they are doing exactly the same thing (though to put this in perspective, Miers' lack of experience as a judge is a major factor as well).

This is probably worse than a Gonzales nomination. If Dems are smart, they will just step back and let this play-out. Of course, since they aren't they're sure to jump right in.

Ouch. Can we get a "do-over" here?

UPDATE: Drudge reports Miers gave $$ to Clinton/Gore. The final nail?

UPDATE II: Confirm Them "confirms" that the above is just a false rumor. While she did give to Gore in '88, she never gave to Clinton.

It seems Miers is a recovering Democrat like myself.

All this hysteria reminds me of that scene in Airplane, when the flight attendant announces that they're out of coffee.

UPDATE III:
Hugh Hewitt and BeldarBlog are appealing for calm. Their perspectives are very well worth considering.

Posted by: Gary at 11:00 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 260 words, total size 2 kb.

1 I was really hoping for someone that would really get the Dems in a twist ... like David Duke.

Posted by: mdmhvonpa at October 03, 2005 12:13 PM (6x1mQ)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

It will take a little while for the smoke to clear and be able to look at this one with some perspective, but the initial reaction from Conservatives ranges from confusion to outrage.

Keep in mind that in the first hours (and even days) following the announcement of Roberts there were similar rumblings of discontent (remember how apoplectic Ann Coutler got?). That Miers is a Conservative is not really in doubt. But the general feeling I'm getting from the Right side of the Blogosphere is that this was a blown opportunity to appoint someone in the Scalia/Thomas mold and that it's at best 50/50 that Bush will get a chance to make an third appointment before his term runs out.

This is going to be an interesting week.

Posted by: Gary at 10:15 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 136 words, total size 1 kb.

One of the biggest concerns the Left had about Bush's next nominee was that - like Roberts - he or she would be a "stealth" nominee. That is to say they feared getting a nominee without a record of decisions or public statements. For this would would make it very difficult to portray that nominee to the American public as "extreme".

Well, they got stealth in spades here. While her legal credentials are OK, she has never been a judge. And Roberts already reinforced the Ginsberg precedent of not commenting on specific cases.

So where does that leave the Left? First and foremost expect them to paint Miers as a Bush crony who will be influenced by her loyalty to the President when deciding any case. It's already started. The Washington Post, in its article announcing Miers' nomination reports that here Bush is "reaching into his loyal inner circle for another pick that could reshape the nation's judiciary for years to come." more...

Posted by: Gary at 08:58 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 360 words, total size 2 kb.