George Will Lays The Smackdown on Bush, Miers

[NATO AIR]

ouch

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/10/04/AR2005100400954.html

Can This Nomination Be Justified?

By George F. Will

Wednesday, October 5, 2005; Page A23

Senators beginning what ought to be a protracted and exacting scrutiny of Harriet Miers should be guided by three rules. First, it is not important that she be confirmed. Second, it might be very important that she not be. Third, the presumption -- perhaps rebuttable but certainly in need of rebutting -- should be that her nomination is not a defensible exercise of presidential discretion to which senatorial deference is due.

It is not important that she be confirmed because there is no evidence that she is among the leading lights of American jurisprudence, or that she possesses talents commensurate with the Supreme Court's tasks. The president's "argument" for her amounts to: Trust me. There is no reason to, for several reasons.


He has neither the inclination nor the ability to make sophisticated judgments about competing approaches to construing the Constitution. Few presidents acquire such abilities in the course of their pre-presidential careers, and this president particularly is not disposed to such reflections.

Furthermore, there is no reason to believe that Miers's nomination resulted from the president's careful consultation with people capable of such judgments. If 100 such people had been asked to list 100 individuals who have given evidence of the reflectiveness and excellence requisite in a justice, Miers's name probably would not have appeared in any of the 10,000 places on those lists.

In addition, the president has forfeited his right to be trusted as a custodian of the Constitution. The forfeiture occurred March 27, 2002, when, in a private act betokening an uneasy conscience, he signed the McCain-Feingold law expanding government regulation of the timing, quantity and content of political speech. The day before the 2000 Iowa caucuses he was asked -- to ensure a considered response from him, he had been told in advance that he would be asked -- whether McCain-Feingold's core purposes are unconstitutional. He unhesitatingly said, "I agree." Asked if he thought presidents have a duty, pursuant to their oath to defend the Constitution, to make an independent judgment about the constitutionality of bills and to veto those he thinks unconstitutional, he briskly said, "I do."

It is important that Miers not be confirmed unless, in her 61st year, she suddenly and unexpectedly is found to have hitherto undisclosed interests and talents pertinent to the court's role. Otherwise the sound principle of substantial deference to a president's choice of judicial nominees will dissolve into a rationalization for senatorial abdication of the duty to hold presidents to some standards of seriousness that will prevent them from reducing the Supreme Court to a private plaything useful for fulfilling whims on behalf of friends.

CONTINUE ARTICLE AT LINK

 

[dilloduck]

ouch

It seems as though the conservatives are more bothered by the nearly apologetic ( and oddly arrogant at the same time) manner in which Bush submits her as a nominee as they are about her qualifications or her politics. I think the right wants a bloody victory and have some liberal heads to hold up on a pike.

 

[William Joyce]

This column ROCKS ASS. Will used to be a hero to me, but dropped down when he picked up neoconnism. Still, there's no denying he's smart as a whip and can still throw down when necessary.

 

[Bonnie]

It seems as though the conservatives are more bothered by the nearly apologetic ( and oddly arrogant at the same time) manner in which Bush submits her as a nominee as they are about her qualifications or her politics. I think the right wants a bloody victory and have some liberal heads to hold up on a pike.

And what if she really is conservative and her lack of a judicial record would make it very tough for Liberals to fight her nomination. Jay Sekulow from the ACL&J knows her, and says she is very conservative. It's funny if this turns out to be true and she is confirmed there will be some conservatives who are disappointed that Bush didin't pick a nominee who would never had been approved by the Senate Juduciary committee but Bush would have made his point that he is tough and looking for a fight with the Dems.

 

[dilloduck]

And what if she really is conservative and her lack of a judicial record would make it very tough for Liberals to fight her nomination. Jay Sekulow from the ACL&J knows her, and says she is very conservative. It's funny if this turns out to be true and she is confirmed there will be some conservatives who are disappointed that Bush didin't pick a nominee who would never had been approved by the Senate Juduciary committee but Bush would have made his point that he is tough and looking for a fight with the Dems.

Agreed----I think the stategy is to slip the dems a mickey here but dammit--there STILL are no liberal heads rolling.

 

[pegwinn]

Depending on where you read, GW's IQ is 3 points lower than a carrot (a special kind of stupid my wife would say) or he's an evil genius.

Lets look at the latest nominee thru those eyes.

Rock theory. He's a doofus. AS usual GW is going for the crony feel good thing. He stupidly believes that he can placate everyone with a wishy washy noncontroversial candidate and it is backfiring. Yeah we'll let this one in, because she can be turned. Way to go dummy.

Evil Genius theory. He knows she will not be confirmed. It's a setup. He called Janice Rodgers Brown and told her to start rehearsing. When grandma gets dropped he will begin to ratchet up the pressure by nominating people farther to the right. Judge Roy Moore is also on the short list.

I hope his portrait looks like..............

 

[Bonnie]

Depending on where you read, GW's IQ is 3 points lower than a carrot (a special kind of stupid my wife would say) or he's an evil genius.

Lets look at the latest nominee thru those eyes.

Rock theory. He's a doofus. AS usual GW is going for the crony feel good thing. He stupidly believes that he can placate everyone with a wishy washy noncontroversial candidate and it is backfiring. Yeah we'll let this one in, because she can be turned. Way to go dummy.

Evil Genius theory. He knows she will not be confirmed. It's a setup. He called Janice Rodgers Brown and told her to start rehearsing. When grandma gets dropped he will begin to ratchet up the pressure by nominating people farther to the right. Judge Roy Moore is also on the short list.

I hope his portrait looks like..............

I think W's as doofus as a fox....

 

[NATO AIR]

She's an evangelist, so that makes me feel better about the nomination, but not enough to consider it a good one.

 

[Abbey Normal]

And what if she really is conservative and her lack of a judicial record would make it very tough for Liberals to fight her nomination. Jay Sekulow from the ACL&J knows her, and says she is very conservative. It's funny if this turns out to be true and she is confirmed there will be some conservatives who are disappointed that Bush didin't pick a nominee who would never had been approved by the Senate Juduciary committee but Bush would have made his point that he is tough and looking for a fight with the Dems.

Good analysis, Bonnie. I'd rep you, but i just did...