A LTE I wrote today. I think it's good policy to keep pounding on the Republicans on cronyism and corruption. The news will be reinforcing those themes for at least the next couple of months, I hope.
Only five weeks after we’ve seen the destruction wrought to real American people by the disastrous mismanagement of FEMA, George Bush has elected to nominate a personal crony to one of the most important jobs in the nation. Harriet Miers is, by all accounts, a good lawyer. America is full of good lawyers. By what possible measure can she be regarded as fit to sit at the very highest level of the American system of jurisprudence? Apparently, it’s because she is a long time, avid supporter of George W. Bush. This is an incredible failure of both imagination and responsibility, for the President to decide that his own, personal lawyer should decide the fate of Americans for at least 20 years.
Members of this administration entered their reign with the puerile fantasy that they would stride the world stage like colossi, “making their own reality,” which can be studied by journalists and historians later. Unfortunately, instead of a group of Machiavellis, Richelieus and Bismarks, we have a strange amalgam of U. S. Grant and Gomer Pyle. We’ve seen chronic corruption and cronyism combined with a naive ignorance of the way people will respond to their shenanigans, but the thoughtless expectation of success anyway.
A nomination to the Supreme Court is far too important to be treated with all the diligence of an office manager hiring a secretary for the pool. I have had enough of cronies placed in positions vastly beyond their competence. I say NO to Harriet Miers. America deserves better.
Bush is fooling no one. "I picked the best person I could find" means she will cover my ass when things get tough in the very near future and bend to whatever I want.
Posted by Judith at October 4, 2005 08:46 AMMan, I just can't wait for the first Scalia opinion where he rips into Miers--it will come, and it will be a thing to behold.
Not only does the Myers pick show intense disrespect for all the better qualified nominees, it shows intense disrespect for the entire institution of the courts--Miers is good enough because Bush says so, and high-falutin' talk about "jurisprudence" and "dignity" isn't going to change his mind. If Bush wants a hack, the justices should feel grateful; hey, they had enough faith in him to give him the job, didn't they?
Now, a lot of people who get to the Supreme Court have what's called "judicial temperament," and they would never stoop to abusing Miers just because her very presence demeans the justices around her. Scalia? Not so much.
Posted by dj moonbat at October 4, 2005 08:55 AMWell, it's difficult for me to believe that this long practicing attorney, who has had many sophisticated corporate clients, could POSSIBLY turn out to be more of an intellectual hack than Clarence Thomas.
Posted by euzoius at October 4, 2005 09:02 AMWell, she'll be just as much of a hack, but less concerned with the intellectual trappings of "originalism."
Posted by dj moonbat at October 4, 2005 09:06 AMThe part I loved was Bush was telling the Nation how well he knew Miers, and because of that close relationship, his knowledge of her was extensive and personal. The comes the question about the big "A" word, and all of a sudden he has no idea what she believes.
Posted by Judith at October 4, 2005 09:16 AMSteve's comment is almost the best comment I've seen yet on this matter. The enigmatic core best-yet comment, however, has to be from Miers herself, if she really believes Bush is the smartest person she knows.
Even his mother won't buy that one.
Maybe Bush is breaking new ground here by going with the mother he wishes he had, instead of the mother he has.
Posted by serial catowner at October 4, 2005 09:19 AMReally nice Steve. Your contempt for America is showing thru nicely.
Centrist, you just can't see the point, can you? There is no contempt for the country in Steve's post, there is contempt for Bush and his photo ops.
Posted by ann at October 4, 2005 09:29 AMYou just do not get it. If all things were equal, no one would even notice the flags. However, after almost five years of selling his bullshit, the flags represent just more bullshit.
Posted by Judith at October 4, 2005 09:42 AMSo, pointing out the flags in the background is showing contempt for America? Or was it calling them pretty that's unpatriotic? Sheesh, Centrist, it's so hard to be a good citizen anymore when the code words keep changing. What's really funny is that's the only thing you found wrong with the post.
Posted by iamcoyote at October 4, 2005 09:44 AMSo he makes a smart ass comment about the flag to prove that point. Whatever!
It wasn't a "smart ass comment" about the flag - it was a "smart ass comment" about Bush. He was not in any way shape or form denigrating the flag or the country. Bush does not equal America or the American flag.
Posted by ann at October 4, 2005 09:46 AMc'mon trolls..here's another opportunity to show how you hate America..come support your failed, corrupt, fascist Dear Leader the chimp, now..assholes...
Posted by headxray at October 4, 2005 09:50 AMPoppy said the same of Clarence Thomas: "the most qualified person in the country to sit on the SCOTUS." Miers is an even more worrisome pick from the cronyism angle than was Abe Fortas-Fortas had qualifications.
Interesting that both Miers and Condoleeza Rice are unmarried childless women who exhibit fanatic and slavish devotion to the Bush. it makes for an interesting psychoanytic character study.
back in the 80s it was often said "It's not how well you do your job, but how well you do your boss." seems like that's the mantra chez Bush.
Posted by susan at October 4, 2005 10:01 AMSo then, you think the flag is ugly, Centrist? I guess that shows your contempt for America, doesn't it?
Posted by iamcoyote at October 4, 2005 10:54 AMCentrist you're a prick so STFU.
You wanna know what's wrong the flags all lined up behing Bush? Well, I'll tell you what it is.
It has something to do with the flag images the Nazi fanatic fascists used to employ as backdrops for their own dear leader. What Bush and the Republicans are doing is no different and just as scary. It tells us that the image of our flag is enough to be repeated ad infinitum (that's Latin for infinity)to riase patriotism to new levels no matter what the policy is and no matter what the actual intent of the pols. So you should be suspicious and skeptical when this bunch uses an image to futher thier political ends. The flag in itself is not the thing in itself. The ideals that it represents are what is worth honoring and protecting, and with these sob's they are discrediting the flag, it's image and it's ideals to further their own rotten ill conceived ends.
And I have noticed that they started using this tactic not long after September 11, 2001 to give aWol more credit than he deserves.
So fuck off. It's a sick pre-conceived tatic and deserves to be commented on by Steve and others.
She's pro-gay rights.
Can you imagine republicans running in 2006 trying to explain to their base why they voted for a pro-gay nominee? You think she's going to get enough republican votes to get on the Supreme Court? Even if all the Democrats vote yes for her confirmation?
Man, have you read Malkin's blog today? She's scathing at Bush for this pick.
Posted by muckdog at October 4, 2005 10:57 AMThis is all old news. Miers is as good as confirmed already. No matter what, it's just great that it's Bush doing the appointments and not Gore or Kerry.
The big question is who will Bush appoint to replace Stevens? He's already off the actuarial charts, so its a safe bet he's dead or retired before Bush hands over the presidency to Jeb.
I just hope that in another 20 to 30 years, when the next opportunity to change the make-up of the court comes around, someone as principled as GW Bush makes the picks.
Posted by j.west at October 4, 2005 11:06 AMonce again west shows how much he hates America...keep supporting that fascist, asshole....
Posted by headxray at October 4, 2005 11:12 AMMuck, where do you keep coming up with Miers being "pro-gay rights?" Even Andrew Sullivan isn't saying this:
Here's an interesting story. Back in 1989, Harriet Miers gave answers to a questionnaire on gay rights when she was running for the Dallas city council. She didn't favor repeal of anti-sodomy laws, but she did say yes to the question:
"Do you believe that gay men and lesbians should have the same civil rights as non-gay men and women?"
She was noncommittal on several other questions, saying, for example, that she would be willing to discuss the need for a law prohibiting discrimination in housing or public accommodations against people who had AIDS or were HIV-positive.
Asked whether qualified candidates should be denied city employment because they are gay or lesbian, she said, "I believe that employers should be able to pick the best qualified person for any position to be filled considering all relevant factors."
I'm not sure what to make of this, except to say that this was 1989, and that her refusal to endorse discrimination against gays and lesbians on those grounds alone speaks well of her. (Hey, this was Texas in 1989.) Her view that people could be arrested for private consensual sex, however, was and is alarming. But a whole lot of people have changed their minds on that in the last decade or so. Maybe Miers is one of them. I think it's a fair question to ask of her at the Senate hearings: "Do you believe that gay men and lesbians should have the same civil rights as non-gay men and women?" And: "What do you understand by the term 'civil rights'?"
Her take on gay rights issues seems to be about the same as Bush's: don't discriminate. (Well, with the exception that homosexuals shouldn't be allowed to marry and that's just anout GOP wedge point.)
Posted by ann at October 4, 2005 11:17 AMWhen will everyone realize that bu$h wants judicial power, along with his executive power! It's all part of turdblossom's plan! He wants to control every branch, so he can suck the life blood that is barely left from this once great nation! He will stop at nothing until his cronies pockets are overflowing, and we the people cannot stand up to him because we are so dependent on his cronies meager crumbs!!
Posted by bbtb at October 4, 2005 11:19 AMbbtb,
Perhaps no one took the time to explain "trickle down crumb" theory to you.
No matter. The Rovian Master Plan will not be complete until Greenspan is replaced in a few weeks.
Once monetary policy is under our complete control, capitalism can run amok. The rich will get richer and the poor - well, I guess the poor by definition can't get poorer but we'll find some way making their life harder.
As Tom Hayden told Vito Corleone "Today we have the courts and the fed, and they're the best things to have."
Posted by j.west at October 4, 2005 11:39 AMYeah Centrist, everything is peachy...hope you got that big raise you were looking for.
Great to here from you again too.
Look forward to your next post.
...capitalism can run amok. The rich will get richer and the poor - well, I guess the poor by definition can't get poorer but we'll find some way making their life harder.
I think he was trying to be funny here?
Scary.
Posted by snark at October 4, 2005 11:56 AMThe easy with which you fly off the handle at the slightest thing is the reason so many here find humor in your choice of moniker Centrist.
Christ. All Steve did was critique the Bushies use of stagecraft and you're acting like he wiped his ass with the flag off a veterans casket or something.
Centrist!
LOL!
Posted by snark at October 4, 2005 12:00 PMNow that's just B.S. The Flag only represents America for you when a Democrat is in front of it! You freakin' amaze me!!
Posted by Centrist at October 4, 2005 10:04 AM
I no - troll food, but:
OK, I'll bite, how many pictures of President Clinton were taken with more than two American flags in the background?
To make fun of it just shows how petty you people are.
And I'd say that making such a big fuss about a single comment - not to mention taking it out of context - shows how insecure you are.
Posted by ann at October 4, 2005 12:22 PMbut I was getting tired of all the bitching I see over the stupidest little things he does
Centrist, you're right. We'll stop bitching about his destruction of the economy, his attack on the environment, the starting of an illegal war, etc. It's those stupid little things that make smartass remarks about the flag so unendurable, huh?
Posted by iamcoyote at October 4, 2005 12:31 PMCareful iamcoyote.
Someone might accuse you of 'hate speech'.
Posted by snark at October 4, 2005 01:00 PMFood fight.
Posted by leaving at October 4, 2005 01:18 PMI've got mashed potatoes and I'm not afraid to use them!
Posted by iamcoyote at October 4, 2005 01:23 PMUmm centrist....the main gist of Steve's post dealt with Miers being an unqualified crony and the criticisms from both the right and the left about her. Then you come in here and to quote your own words "bitch" about Steve's descpription of the flag and the presser, as usual missing the main idea of the post. Talk about your "bitching about the stupidest little thing" that's certainly what your little hissy fit about Steve's flag description was here today. Way to prove your point.
Posted by emal at October 4, 2005 02:09 PMBush hates work, picking someone he already knew saved him countless hours of work researching other candidates, countless hours working out the politics of the choice with Rove and countless hours vetting his choices through Grover Norquist. He took the easy way out,the quick pick. "hey Harriet, why don't you just do it so I can fly down to Crawfish TX and get a buzz on".
Posted by T2 at October 4, 2005 02:26 PMJudith; you took the words right out of my mouth. Like you I feel that bush decide to put Miers, who think that he is sooo smart, in office because of a possible indictment for the Palme scandal.
Was she his lawyer to get him of the “inside trading” business?
I imagine that conservatives are feeling as used as a douche bag in a bordello about now.
Posted by Bob Sakowski at October 4, 2005 02:53 PMJohn B. Thanks for your post on the flag issue. Well said. I just didn't have the energy to go into something that would only fall on deaf ears.
Posted by Judith at October 4, 2005 04:11 PMbbtb, you are so right. Bush is building a political machine, not a political movement, and he is the heir.
Posted by Judith at October 4, 2005 04:25 PMJ. West, you are one sick motherfucker!
Posted by at October 4, 2005 04:27 PMCentrist is very touchy these days. He can't stand the dialogue here at TLC, but if you notice, he never leaves. Hey Centrist, it's pretty difficult having your facist leader attacked, isn't it? Well hon, now you know how it feels. LOL LOL LOL
Posted by Judith at October 4, 2005 04:34 PMthat's "fascist leader" before someone points out my misspelling.
Posted by Judith at October 4, 2005 05:24 PMI was wondering, does anyone else think that when bu$h was reading, "My Pet Goat", for those 7 extra minutes, he was fantsizing about Miers? Shit, she probably has pictures of him in compromising positions during his days in the Texas National Guard.
O.K., that visual was uncalled for. With Halloween approaching though, I went for scary!
Posted by bbtb at October 4, 2005 06:33 PMreally, it probably was the "best he could do". Sad excuse for a president. But then, he never really wanted the job anyway. Just a patsy.
Posted by T2 at October 4, 2005 06:46 PM"The Best I could find..."
There is something George W. Bush doesn't get. It's not all about him, him being president, him doing what he wants. In his mind, he's president, he won the election (hah) and he should be able to appoint whomever he damn well pleases, cuz dammit, he's da man.
And the serious people in the conservative base are astonished by this. Which is astonishing it itself, because the man has never shown a trace of maturity in his life. They coddled and appeased this half-grown man because they thought he would get them to this golden point in history. And then he fucks it up for them because he IS all-powerful. At least in this regard, of making the actual decision.
George Bush is probably very confused by this. He thought they loved him for who he is!
Posted by Dumbo at October 5, 2005 11:29 PM