Home / Harriet Miers: Good Joke or Bad Joke?

Harriet Miers: Good Joke or Bad Joke?

Please Share...Print this pageTweet about this on TwitterShare on Facebook0Share on Google+0Pin on Pinterest0Share on Tumblr0Share on StumbleUpon0Share on Reddit0Email this to someone

That Harriet Miers is a joke, we have no reason to doubt. David Frum reports that Miers “once told me that the president was the most brilliant man she had ever met.” David — whatever you may think about his views; he’s a very swift guy — must have choked. I mean, it’s one thing to argue that Bush is the Right man, but I can’t imagine that David seriously considers him a Bright man. Either Miers doesn’t get out much, or — more likely — she’s a besotted groupie, and an intellectual lightweight. In fact, when David first floated her name, he admits, “I have to confess that at the time, I was mostly joking.”

Can anybody be thrilled with this nomination? The right wing is weeping into its collective beer. The liberal center is scratching its collective head, feeling that it may have dodged a bullet, only to be slapped in the face with a wet fish. I mean, come on folks: this is funny. The woman is not second-rate; she’s not third-rate; she doesn’t even rate. Harriet Miers is a nice woman, who graduated from unimpressive schools, and “rose” through the Texas ranks (in other words drifted sideways and slightly downward). Here we have a candidate only marginally more impressive than the president himself. I suspect this is the problem: Bush, who has managed to convince himself that overcoming alcoholism is sufficient reason to deserve the presidency, has no concept of mediocrity. He just doesn’t get it. The Roberts appointment was not about excellence (and I do believe, as I have argued elsewhere, that he is a truly impressive man): Bush accidentally chose a man with demonstrable virtues, while doing an entirely incidental calculus.

One huge supporter of Ms. Miers is none other than Joseph Allbaugh, that towering figure of competence and objectivity, who installed his roommate at the head of the Federal Emergency Management Agency. So, Michael Brown bagged FEMA, and Harriet’s off to the Supreme Court. We may even witness the odd sight of Democratic senators filling out the majority in support of this nomination, in the absence of full support from the right. I’m wondering, in fact, whether we’ll see this appointment deep-sixed by Republicans.

So, where does this leave those of us who don’t want to see the court turned into a playground for hillbilly activists in constructionist drag? Well, for one thing, I’m not too happy about becoming a cheerleader for the bozocracy. And let’s not get too comfortable here: the last mediocrity appointed by the right was Clarence Thomas. It’s not entirely clear that liberals should be celebrating.

On the other hand, she’s sixty years old. So we’re only stuck with Harriet Miers for a while, and there’s a good chance the president who chooses her replacement will be a Democrat. (Republicans look as if they’re not likely to have a lock on power in the foreseeable future: I never would have expected it, but Americans seem to have at last overwhelmingly recognized their shameful error in voting for this administration.)

My advice? Let the GOP hang itself. This is hardly worth wasting a filibuster on: if Republicans choose to approve this non-entity, then that’s their funeral — further proof that this clan is about little more than cronyism and myopic allegiance. If they choose not to let his choice pass, then we can sit back and watch the right wing shoot their own buffoon in the foot: the last thing George needs is to be abandoned by his loony core at this precise moment in his decline.


If this post felt like a kick in the head, and you enjoy that feeling, visit Dysblog

Powered by

About visigoth

  • Nancy

    Ref your comments #6 & 9, even a blind pig finds an acorn once in a while, Dave.

  • Roger

    Karl Rove today revealed that Harriet
    Miers is actually Robert Bork after a
    sex change, so the conservatives are now happy

  • This is a puzzlement! I am still trying to figure out the strategy being employed where by GWB. Personally I feel outraged that he would select a person with the lack of qualification. However,let’s consider his selection criteria. Hmmm… She did such a good job at finding him Roberts that she should get a shot as a Supreme Court Justice for the REST OF HER LIFE …. That is the one of the most frightening pieces of logic I have ever heard.

    It is like giving your real estate agent a summer home because she did a good job finding your primary residence for you! So it can’t be that simple can it? That illogical? No… a smokescreen I’m sure. (Unless he really is a dolt. But then, even the Right Wing Conservatives are begining to think that.)

    Maybe he figures…. I will get someone in there with a “wink” to all the Right Wing Ultra Conservatives out there, after all, she is a Evangelist and once she is in there she will legislate from the bench in reverse no doubt (he hopes)… afterall she has no paper trail. Since everyone sees her as a lightweight… BAM… she enters the court as a ringer!!

    Then there is always the fall back position strategy… GW thinks.. “Hmmm, If she is likeable and appears a moderate… she’ll get nominated and I have appeased the moderates but if she gets drilled like Bork did by the Democrats in te hearing, it will make the Left look really bad. I’ll get her to pull out of the nomination, afterall, maybe she was not really up to it and that could be sold to the public. Then I will spring Justice Brown on the Senate as a second pick…” Show these cards behind closed doors to the Judiciary Committee and replace her with someone CLEARLY on the far right so that the Nuclear option is used and he can argue, that the Democrates left him no choice. Is he really that smart? Hmmm.

    Either way folks, don’t kid yourself… once this women is in there it’s curtains for Roe v Wade, Federal Gay Rights, the EEOC and Gun Control, Stem Cell research, and all things liberal. The hands of time will begin to wind in the other direction.

    ZZ Bachman / ZardozZ News & Satire Portal ( http://zardozz.com/zz/ )
    Have a Blog? Ring Surf it @ ZZ OpenRing ( http://zardozz.com/openring.htm )

  • Doug,

    I think Harriet looks like someone Alice Cooper may have dated; or maybe, even it’s old Alice after a clean-up. Can’t be sure.

  • alethinos

    Dave I am rushing about after my last post – how did Thomas vote in Kelo?


  • The Searcher

    Rumor has it that during her confirmation hearing she’s going to make John Roberts look chatty by comparison. I can’t wait to follow this one.

  • Alethinos, Thomas voted against the Kelo decision, so he’s alright with me.


  • alethinos

    Oh please Dave! The only person more ridiculous than Thomas is Scalia! Thomas isn’t consistant anything EXCEPT consistantly mediocre.

    Long Live Steely Dan!


  • I was waiting for someone to put in a good word for mediocrity.

  • >>the last mediocrity appointed by the right was Clarence Thomas<< And he's proven to be the most consistent and reliably reasonable justice on the court after O'Connor. Dave

  • Hahaha… and if you’re wondering what *that* post has to do with jurisprudence — sorry, was meant to go in another thread entirely (on over-rated bands, not over-rated judicial nominees).

  • Surely Steely Dan deserves the #1 spot here. Although they’d have to arm-wrestle it out with Nick Drake.

    The Sex Pistols were giants. They changed everything. Were they coughed up by their own private version of the starmaking machine? Sure. But what McLaren did for them is no more than what any major label does for a new package. In a funny way, they’re analogous to the Monkees (a guilty pleasure) — both were monsters cooked up by Frankenstein publicists.

  • alethinos

    Good post D.A.C.!


  • (Thank you! Actually, it’s a mutual admiration society: I’ve long had your blog linked to Dysblog.)

  • Well said Douglas. I wish I could write like you.