I Didn't Know There Still Were People Named Harriet
President Bush nominated Harriet Miers to the US Supreme Court calling her a pit bull in size 6 shoes. And I know as much about her as I do about your average pit bull.
So Bush helped us out. She believes in "the rule of law" and the "cause of Justice," he said. She will not legislate from the bench, he assured. Yada yada yada. It's the kind of introduction you could make for any breathing person using catch phrases that have become canned and altogether meaningless.
So I looked to the media on my quick ride to work and found NPR doing yeoman's work for Bush by starting off its coverage of Miers with the fact that she gave $1,000 to Al Gore in 1988. Awful cheap price to appear even-handed especially given that the powers that be in Texas at the time were Democrats. Absent was any analysis of how Miers views the great issues of the day that would come before her as a Supreme Court Justice.
So is Miers qualified? No. I believe the Senate's power to consent to this appointment is the people's check on the President's power to make a decision that will affect us for decades. I believe candidates should have records from which they can be judged and should be fully forthcoming as to their views regarding past Supreme Court decisions. She fails horribly on the first count.
The tougher question is, from a political standpoint, do liberals take an unknown over knowns like Michael Luttig, Priscilla Owen or Janice Rodgers Brown. Do we breathe a sigh of relief and hope she is a pragmatist as opposed to an idealogue?
So Bush helped us out. She believes in "the rule of law" and the "cause of Justice," he said. She will not legislate from the bench, he assured. Yada yada yada. It's the kind of introduction you could make for any breathing person using catch phrases that have become canned and altogether meaningless.
So I looked to the media on my quick ride to work and found NPR doing yeoman's work for Bush by starting off its coverage of Miers with the fact that she gave $1,000 to Al Gore in 1988. Awful cheap price to appear even-handed especially given that the powers that be in Texas at the time were Democrats. Absent was any analysis of how Miers views the great issues of the day that would come before her as a Supreme Court Justice.
So is Miers qualified? No. I believe the Senate's power to consent to this appointment is the people's check on the President's power to make a decision that will affect us for decades. I believe candidates should have records from which they can be judged and should be fully forthcoming as to their views regarding past Supreme Court decisions. She fails horribly on the first count.
The tougher question is, from a political standpoint, do liberals take an unknown over knowns like Michael Luttig, Priscilla Owen or Janice Rodgers Brown. Do we breathe a sigh of relief and hope she is a pragmatist as opposed to an idealogue?
posted by Macswain at
9:33 AM
1 Comments:
Is she qualified? What does the Constitution indicate that the qualifications are ? Outside of those qualifications, have you taken it upon yourself to place additional extra-Constitutional considerations on an appointment?
By
Anonymous, at 12:35 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home