A Canard and a Question
First: Dick Durbin has argued today that the withdrawal of Harriet Miers is the result of criticism by "the radical right wing." Well, Senator Durbin, welcome to those ranks. The linked story's title says it all -- "Durbin Criticizes Miers."
The fact is that discontent with Harriet Miers wasn't the exclusive province of any one party -- or any one faction within any one party. I disagreed with those who wanted Miers to withdraw, but they're not "right wing radicals" -- not even close. They are mainstream conservatives . . . and politically, they resemble the great bulk of America much more than Dick Durbin does. The most intemperate, unacceptable and unfair remarks made anywhere by anyone about Harriet Miers pales next to Senator Durbin's own unforgivably intemperate equation of American soldiers with torturers and mass murderers.
Second, Patrick Leahy has just insisted that there are judicial candidates that could win bipartisan acceptance and acclaim -- that have received "strong votes from both Republicans and Democrats." Well, I have a question for Senator Leahy and the other Dems who have so much to say today: Who do you want to see nominated this time? We're "consulting" you -- so don't be coy. Names, please.
The fact is that discontent with Harriet Miers wasn't the exclusive province of any one party -- or any one faction within any one party. I disagreed with those who wanted Miers to withdraw, but they're not "right wing radicals" -- not even close. They are mainstream conservatives . . . and politically, they resemble the great bulk of America much more than Dick Durbin does. The most intemperate, unacceptable and unfair remarks made anywhere by anyone about Harriet Miers pales next to Senator Durbin's own unforgivably intemperate equation of American soldiers with torturers and mass murderers.
Second, Patrick Leahy has just insisted that there are judicial candidates that could win bipartisan acceptance and acclaim -- that have received "strong votes from both Republicans and Democrats." Well, I have a question for Senator Leahy and the other Dems who have so much to say today: Who do you want to see nominated this time? We're "consulting" you -- so don't be coy. Names, please.
posted by LadybugUSA at 4:05 PM
7 Comments:
Anyone who still wonders "where's the crime?" in outing Valerie Plame, read this excellent editorial in the Denver Post (there's a great hook at the end of the article.)
http://denverpost.com/opinion/ci_3147655
Carol,
Thanks for participating at the Confirm Them site. I started out pro-Miers. After two weeks I became anti-Miers. But your posts in defense of Miers challenged me to think harder about the advantages and disadvantages of the nomination. Don't let the hotheads at that site scare you away. We need differing perspectives.
Mark (a.k.a. Rock)
Dick Durbin has argued today that the withdrawal of Harriet Miers is the result of criticism by "the radical right wing." Well, Senator Durbin, welcome to those ranks.
Carol, are you really trying to claim that Harriet Miers withdrew her nomination because of Dick Durbin's criticism? Hahahahahahahaha.
With a 70% approval rating among rank and file conservatives (number from the Washington Times), you can't even blame the base. No, Harriet Miers pulled her nomination after virtually all of the Right Wing Elites (minus you and Hugh) read her 1993 speech and turned on her. No up or down vote, just the Conservative Priesthood getting to exercise a veto.
Hypocrites.
Who do you want to see nominated this time?
No one cares about who I want to see nominated, so I'll make a quick prediction of who is going to be nominated.
I argued all along that the selection of Harriet Miers was easily predicted given the President's tendency toward cronyism. I will touch on another aspect of President Bush's character to make my prediction.
The President doesn't take defeat well and has a vindictive streak towards those who turn on him. The right has turned on Bush, so he will repay them with Alberto Gonzales.
I argued all along that the selection of Harriet Miers was easily predicted given the President's tendency toward cronyism.
Sorry... but you actually knew beforehand who Harriet Miers was? Pardon me for finding that very hard to believe.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
I think we all (myself included) get in trouble making predictions about this administration.
But heck, it sure is FUN !!
Bush is vindictive...but he's also a suck-up to the ultra right.
Gonzales is a interesting prediction but I think Bush is just as likely to go for the "Oh holy rollers forgive me" tears-streaming-down-his-cheek-Jimmy-Swargart-style attempt at right wing penetance and pick Alito, Luttig or Brown (in no particlar order). (And that may well be Part II of the Mier ruse).
This is going to be a battle. Right wingers want to change the face of the court. Left wing obviously doesn't want that. The algorithm in this is simple. The more Bush tries to change the court the bigger a nomination battle he will trigger. Any conservative who says that is unjustified is lying to then say they wouldn't do the exact same thing if the tables were turned.
Don't be fooled. Justices are not supposed to be political once they are appointed, however it is (and should be) a VERY political process to get them there in the first place.
Post a Comment
<< Home