Should Harriet Miers be confirmed as Associate Justice on the United States Supreme Court? Two sides dig in...
preg_replace('/<\/?p( [^>]*)?>[ ]*/', ' ', preg_replace('/
[ ]*/', ' ', 'From: Eric Berlin @ Center-Left')) I'd like to propose a simple question this week that's likely not so easy to answer from my side or yours:…
To: Phillip Winn @ Center-Right
Subject: Harriet Miers
Article comments
26 - Alethinos
Eric... I agree. My point being that I tend to not trust anyone who apparently, casually tosses aside the faith she was raised in, just at the moment she's becoming a rising star in a state that's just a lil bit hostile to Catholicism.
Given that and that she really hasn't done much in the way of judicial work, never been a judge AND really hasn't done that much in the court room overall...
It bothers me.
Alehtinos
PS Excellent post again Mr. B...
27 - Eric Berlin
Well first, this is what happens! A nomination is made and then people jabber up the wazoo about it.
Secondly, it's very fair game at this point as so much has happened since the nomination was made. Conservatives are up in arms, the Bush admiration (George and Laura included) have responded, there are real signs of s rift between the White House and conservatives, there are many many underlying factors contributing, including Katrina, Iraq, scandals, low poll numbers, etc. etc.
28 - Eric Berlin
Previous comment was in response to DJR.
Alethinos -- It's very interesting, based upon your comment, that religion is now being trotted to show conservatives, Hey, she's one of us, see -- she's religious!
29 - DJRadiohead
Good points all, EB. However:
I'd like to propose a simple question this week that's likely not so easy to answer from my side or yours:
Should Harriet Miers be confirmed as Associate Justice on the United States Supreme Court?
I would submit to best answer that question we need the hearings.
Are there interesting things to discuss as we lead up to those hearings? Absolutely. I still think regardless that too often people are in too big a hurry to write the story before the main event has played out but a lot of the things we were discussing in our exchanges early on make for interesting conversation.
One of the things I am finding interesting in this is something you brought up in #28. Litmus tests are not uncommon in Supreme Court discussions but this is a different kind of litmus test, isn't it. And to listen to the White House try to speak in code on the subject of religion? Fascinating.
30 - Alethinos
Eric... Yes, this is a sad and disgusting display by Bush & Co., it DOES remind me very much of the last WEST WING espisode you mentioned... The scene with Alan Alda was superb - you could FEEL him wanting to reach across the table and slap the crap out of the represenative of those "oh so concerned" church leaders.
And now we see this putrid behavior. We don't discuss her qualifications or lack thereof. Just how often she attended church and was it the RIGHT KIND of church...
Alethinos
31 - DJRadiohead
All of which is why the hearings really cannot start soon enough. If the only qualification Miers has is that she goes to church then we do have a big problem.
It is time to get her in front of the Judiciary Committee. Let's find out what kind of mind and heart she has. If she can tapdance her way through that minefield half as well as Roberts did then she might go a long way to proving she is at least smart enough to do the job.
32 - Eric Berlin
DJR - I very much agree. But it's amazing that a growing chorus of conservative intellectuals (Bill Kristol, Peggy Noonan just today) are calling for Miers to withdraw.
33 - DJRadiohead
If I got 30 seconds in the room with Kristol or Noonan I would say much the same thing. Forget President Bush- Miers at this point at least deserves a chance to be heard and deserves a chance to defend herself. Then at least maybe we will be debating her merits rather her faith (and yes, I recognize it is the right putting her faith at issue right now and not the left).
34 - Eric Berlin
Noonan, at least, is looking to salvage the political standing of this administration. If Miers goes down in committee (with his own party in charge!) it will a devastating blow to an already weakened presidency.
Bush, of course, would never "cut and run." He's a "stay the course" kind of guy, which is why there are not-so-subtle overtures from some to Miers to gracefully withdraw.
35 - Nancy
I don't like her hyperbole. Granted Boy George is her #1 client, so she's got to stroke him, but gushing that the chimp is "the most BRILLIANT man I ever met!" is, as the kids used to say, a 5-fingered gag. Too much sucking up. That is not a good sign, when someone is so slavish about brown-nosing a scumbag politician of any stripe.
36 - Eric Berlin
Nancy, while Phillip and I appreciate your comments, we're trying to establish a more civil level of discourse in this column (and the rest of the political section).
And, really, you steal away the power of your own argument by using the language you've used.
37 - Matthew T. Sussman
Every thread needs a troll to ignore.
I love the To-From setup. This might be awesome if, down the road, additional bloggers and views are brought into the mix. Rationally, of course.
For now, me likey, but "the middle" is not necessarily "moderate" in every instance.
38 - Eric Berlin
Thanks Suss, and yes there are plans in the works to include guests.
And (also) yes, there's no requirement to be "moderate." Phillip and I profess to come from the "center-right" and "center-left," respecively, but what we're really looking to promote is intelligent, substantive, civil, (hopefully) interesting discussions about political stories of the day.
That's why we say at the end of each piece:
Be passionate, think before you write, respect others, and have fun!
39 - Phillip Winn
DJ (#15) -- thanks for the kind words. It is interesting to think about the Senate's role to provide "advice and consent." Is that a high burden or a low one? Hmmm...
Since I suspect that Miers will take the route the last few nominees (from both parties) have taken and give us very few substantial answers in the hearings, it is an interesting question.
Answer questions boldly and have people vote against you for political reasons? Or refuse to answer questions and force people who want to vote against you to either manufacture reasons or admit they're voting against the President who nominated you?
That's about how it shapes up right now, unless they can get her to crack during the hearings.
40 - Phillip Winn
Alethinos (#21), isn't John Roberts a Roman Catholic? That would tend to deflate your suggestion a little, no?
Living here in Texas, I'm not so sure that religion plays as big a part in politics as you're suggesting, but it could be. I just don't pay attention.
41 - Phillip Winn
Suss (#37), we're actually going to need a left-leaning guest in a couple of weeks, as EB is going to be gone all week!
We're definitely looking to mix things up a bit in the future, but wanted to get a few columns under our belt first.
EB and I happen to be who we are, but one of these days he's going to pick on the religious right and I'm going to agree, or I'll find some liberal axiom he doesn't hold, and then we won't really meet "in the middle" at all!
Thanks for the comments, all!
42 - Matthew T. Sussman
One possible subject I'd like to see is, rather than a left-to-right take on it, having two war protesters debating the best way to express their grievances to the government about their overseas actions.
If an A-Bomb nut puts up a fuss, so be it. You'll have that anywhere, it's the freakin' Internet. But it'd make for, if nothing else, positive thoughts within the reader.
43 - Phillip Winn
Given that the suggestion comes with exactly the sort of ideological rhetoric we're trying to avoid included, I think that idea might not be the best one. :-)
44 - Alethinos
PW... I am sure that in certain circles in Texas her being Catholic wouldn't have mattered... However, let's see where she is now and to whom she kowtows... We are talking about a section of the Republican base that are - in most cases, inches away from being outright religious fantatics...
John Roberts was a WHOLE other cat. First he was an appellate court judge from the federal level. Also, (importantly) there is a desire to court "conservative" Catholics - of which there is still a sizable percentage of in this country...
Good thread Eric - keep it up!
Alethinos
45 - Eric Berlin
Phillip said in #39:
Since I suspect that Miers will take the route the last few nominees (from both parties) have taken and give us very few substantial answers in the hearings, it is an interesting question.
The dynamic is very, very different from the Roberts hearings. Short of Roberts super sucking (and he was sharp and smooth as hell both -- everyone admitted it -- even when dodging questions) he had the votes. The Dems only option would be to gather votes for a try at a fillibuster, which would have triggered the nuclear option... and Roberts would still have gotten the votes.
As the opposition is now from the right, there will be intense pressure on Miers to both answer questions across the board about her qualifications (and plan on seeing some tough questions on constitional issues) but to placate the widespread fears on the right that she'll be anything from a wildcard to a moderate once on the court.
46 - DJRadiohead
As Eric notes, Roberts did a brilliant job of not answering questions. People still came away impressed and confident in his itellectual quality. I am sure the fact Roberts had a great resume played some role in this but his performance in the hearings was praised and elevated his status.
If Miers can convince us she has a better command of the law and english language than the president, she will go a long way toward easing some people's minds. I don't expect her to get very specific - she probably shouldn't.
Eric is right, though. She has a challenge Roberts did not. She has to not only convince people she is smart she has to convince people she is 'their' kind of judge.
47 - Bennett
Great job Eric and Phil! And also all of the insightful comments on HM's road ahead.
I'm looking forward to the hearings, and hope that VT public radio carries them live the way they did the Roberts hearings.
48 - Demetrius
i believe she is a bad choice on my standpoint of being a Liberal. I beleive war is wrong unless ABSOLUTLEY inevitable and i believe abortion should be LEGAL due to the fact that a woman has the right to say what she wants to do with her baby because it is her baby. I think that harriet miers is against all of these things and therfore i'd rather see a monkey in office then her.
49 - Phillip Winn
D, what inside knowledge do you have that leads you to believe Miers would help to extend the war (not that the US Supreme Court has much to do with that anyway) or would work (or have the power) to end legal abortion?
Or is the fact that she was nominated by President Bush enough? That's partisan politics, which we try to avoid on these In the Middle posts in favor of reason and respect.
Thanks for the comment.
50 - Dave Nalle
The news did come out yesterday that she signed a document opposing Roe v. Wade in order to get some pro life endorsements when running for the Dallas City Council. How much that's worth is open to debate, as is the concept that in that position she could have done anything about abortion in the first place.
Dave
51 - Phillip Winn
It's probably a decent reflection of her personal views, but doesn't necessarily indicate how she might vote given the chance.
52 - Eric Berlin
One of the main problems with Miers is that there's so little there on record. Thus everyone -- particularly nervous conservatives -- are scrapping and scrambling through the very little that there is to sift through.
It was a little surreal seeing thank you notes from Miers to Bush (You're so awesome, "cool," etc.) read on Chris Matthews' weekend show.
But I believe Miers does have a higher bar to clear than Roberts because of her lack of judicial experience and public record.
53 - Mark Saleski
guys, this is a great feature.
we definitely need more things like this in the politics column.
54 - Eric Berlin
I'm only sad that no one has mentioned Harriet, You'll Drive Me Wild!
55 - Nancy
"Awesome"? "Cool"? And you were objecting to MY language?! Given the context of those adjectives, hers is disgusting.
56 - Eric Berlin
Nancy, I know it's easy and it feels good to vent -- and there's certainly a time and place for that -- but Bush-bashing in of itself will not help to advance the agenda that liberals, progressives, and center-left moderates hold dear.
I forgot who said it, but some pundit or other recently pointed out that a major problem for liberals is that they point at Bush and mock and laugh and expect everyone else to get and join in on the joke.
Obviously, this isn't the case as the election results of 2004 show us.
57 - DJRadiohead
Eric, I cannot remember the thread but I was saying the same thing about what Democrats did with Bush and Republicans did with Clinton.
Republicans were so appalled at Clinton as a person beginning in 1992 that they twice ran a campaign consisting of: "Oh c'mon, it's CLINTON!" No ideas. No agenda. Nothing.
Democrats so dismissed GW Bush as a 'junior' and a lightweight that they ran two campaigns consisting of: "This guy? Are you serious?" No agenda. No ideas. Nothing.
And in the 're-election' campaigns, both camps claimed the incumbents did bad jobs but could never convince people there was a better alternative.
Ideas still count. The messenger and the message matter. Both parties have sat out of the Oval Office for 8 years at a time because they failed to recognize this. I hope the lesson of Clinton/Bush is that ideas DO matter to the voters.
58 - Eric Berlin
Well, I think that '04 had many factors, but underestimating Bush and assuming that people would recognize his and his administration's flaws and flock under the Kerry umbrella is certainly one of them.
59 - DJRadiohead
I think people can point to a lot of factors in the last four races. In my mind, neither party did a credible job of advancing an agenda and did their best to downplay "the other guy."
I really think John Kerry had nothing to say other than "I am not George W. Bush." I think the only domestic agenda he had was scaling back Bush's tax cuts. He promised to pay for a gazillion things I can't remember with that money. That was about it. In my mind, he never gave people a reason to vote for him.
Then look at Bob Dole. All he seemed to have to say was, "Let's get a grown up who served in the military in the White House." Translation: I am not Bill Clinton. Even when he tabbed Kemp - too little, too late. NO ideas. NONE. Just, "We're not Clinton." In my mind, he never gave people a reason to vote for him.