Carol Platt Liebau: Two More Thoughts

Friday, October 07, 2005

Two More Thoughts

(1) I admire Ed Gillespie, but anyone who charges there is an element of "sexism" in any of this discussion -- by anyone on any side -- is just wrong. None of the people who are attacking Miers would have opposed Janice Rogers Brown, Priscilla Owens, or Mary Ann Glendon. There is some basis to the charge of elitism -- not necessarily because a lot of Miers opponents are, in fact, elitist, but because (as I wrote yesterday), "Some . . . of those who oppose Ms. Miers have done so by denigrating her legal skills and background. That’s where the charge of elitism comes from."

(2) As an outspoken person myself, I'm sympathetic to arguments that nominations of those without extensive conservative public records are deeply unjust to those who "take the arrows" in the course of engaging in intellectual combat on behalf of our ideas. But . . . It's been speculated that this appointment may be geared to raising the "comfort level" of other justices (on the left) who may be considering retirement. Some justices might be more willing to retire if they could legitimately hope that their replacements would be a Roberts/Mier, rather than a Luttig/Brown, rather than declining to retire in the style of Chief Justice Rehnquist and Justice Thurgood Marshall, both of whom died while still on the Court.

Just a thought . . .


Blogger Robert said...

Thurgood Marshall resigned from the Court in 1991 (clearing the way for Clarence Thomas) and died in 1993.

On the subject of the charge of elitism, as an opponenet of the Miers nomination, I think that's a smokescreen. As I put it on my blog: It is not elitist to ask for a candidate for the job who has actually shown achievement in relevant areas. I'm sure Mike Brown did a "heck of a job" as head of the International Arabian Horse Association, but that hardly qualified him to run FEMA. I'm sure Julie Myers did a "heck of a job" picking out the right uncle and marrying the right guy, but that hardly qualifies her to run ICE. Where is Mier's relevant experience for the job? Anyone?

5:12 PM  
Blogger Roy Lofquist said...

Those who took the arrows? Who are these yahoos who lay claim to the Republican Party? They claim to be the base?!

The 2000 election was the least political in memory. There was peace and prosperity. Neither candidate could get a bit part in a movie and the biggest issue was the lockbox. The dead even result revealed the base party affiliation in this country.

In 2004 almost 20 million more voters turned out and they went for the President 3 to 2. George Bush led the party to a significant victory in 2002 and then consolidated the Republican hold on government for the next generation. I'll lay odds that not one in a thousand of those 120 million voters would recognize the names of the doomsday chorus so loudly clamoring for their annointed places.

This President was elected by more than 62 million people. Their votes are the ones that count and they voted for George Bush. If these idiots want to pick up their marbles and go home I say "have a nice day".

7:01 PM  
Anonymous jimpfaff said...

Your second thought is a cogent one. But I think it gives the President more credit than is due here. The pursuading factors for a SC justices to leave the bench are of two sorts; ideological consistency of the surrogate justice, or personal matters (to include health and death). The former is not a factor in this case, and neither Roberts nor Miers can influence the latter.

10:16 PM  
Blogger Draino said...

Hey Roy,

Seeing as your a betting guy. I'll see your odds and raise you. The democrats will consolidate power and gain a majority in both houses in 2006 and the Presidency in 2008. Bush consolidated Republican hold on government for the next generation? After this term, Bush will have consolidated the democrats hold on government for a generation.

Bush's presidency is in crisis. His "brain" is about to be indicted. The house majority leader had to step down and the parade of perp walks is only just beginning. Bush is increasingly becoming a laughinstock. Everyone in the country's bailed on him. He has no domestic agenda (anybody heard about "Social Security" lately?) Katrina revealed his administration to be a fiasco. The bad news on the War front never ceases. The latest poll confirms he's even lost his base with Miers. To praise him at this point shows a blind loyalty even I have to (almost) respect.

12:38 AM  
Anonymous DaveB said...

Interesting point Carol on the idea that Stevens and Ginsburg might retire earlier if there was a less rabidly right composition of the court. I'm not sure about Stevens but Ginsburg will never retire. They'll have to drag her corpse from the bench.

1:09 AM  
Blogger Mr. Twister said...

Just a point on sexism and the Harriet Miers nomination. If President Bush had nominated a man of an equally uncompelling background, would we even be having this discussion? Of course not--for such a candidate would be DOA even if he had impeccable conservative credentials.

There is sexism here, but it is of the low expectations variety.

7:35 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...


Using the selection of Michael Brown as head of FEMA is a frequently used but unfair argument against W’s “trust me”. Those who use this argument really owe Brown an apology, especially with what we now know about the hysteria by the media, and the local governments’ paralysis. He defended his role extremely well in the congressional hearing.

8:49 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home