I Oppose Miers

NZ Bear is asking bloggers to take a stand on the Harriet Miers nomination.

I oppose the Miers nomination.

Conservative, moderate, or liberal, we deserve a Supreme Court justice that first of all represents the highest level of jurisprudential (as in theory of laws) thinking.

I’ll have more to say, but right now I need to go do chores.

6 thoughts on “I Oppose Miers”

  1. I dare say that this is the first time in GWB’s presidency that every end of the political spectrum is in complete agreement.

    He always said he wanted to be a uniter and not a divider. :)

  2. I think AL just said what most Americans feel after reading this in the news for two weeks. She reminds me so of Spiro Agnew, before he got chucked out for Maryland state payola (not physically).

  3. I neither oppose nor support the Miers nomination. I do note that she has a lot in her favor (not being a judge is a major one; being vetted as an originalist by president Bush is another) and precious little in opposition. The strongest “anti-” argument is that she may not be _persuasive_ enough to sway other justices when it comes to voting time.

    She wouldn’t have been my first choice, but, then again, I wasn’t elected to make the choice. G.W. Bush was. I admit that the whining by those conservatives taking lessons from DailyKos has me wondering a bit — at them, though, not at Ms. Miers.

    Forgive my saying so, but the whininess sounds like a tantrum of people who are full of themselves and upset at not getting their own way. The Olympic level of conclusion-jumping (prior to the Senate hearings) indicates an irrational source for the outbreaks, rather than a reflective and considered position.

    As I see it, while there may be little to make a conservative _promote_ her nomination, there is even *less* to lead a conservative to _oppose_ her nomination. I sometimes wonder if this “my way (choice) or the highway” attitude will play a part in leading to president H. Clinton nominating Justice O’Connor’s replacement — and others.

  4. I have opposed this nomination from the very start and am shocked at how blind to the wishes of his base the president seems. We deserve a first rate Supreme Court nominee, not this 2nd rate “friend” of the president! The more we hear about Harriet, the more she looks like O’Conner! Someone please give our President back his balls and let’s have a real fight with Ted Kennedy and Joe Biden before it’s too late!

  5. Ooops, it seems a little problem has turned up in the Dallas Council era finances, it seems the City of Dallas during her term paid a very inflated sum to purchase Ms. Miers’ mother’s property (which she had as part of an estate to manage) – and the matter was not resolved during her service on the Council. It isn’t a nannygate, but a bit more on the sleaze factor side.
    (See Sunday’s Dallas Morning News.)

  6. I still have yet to hear why she is ‘uniquely qualified’ for the Supreme Court. That should be a requirement. You shouldn’t just ‘vote’ for someone because you ‘have nothing against them’. That’s the reason you vote for High school class president.

    This is the Supreme Court, and Miers should be able to demonstrate that she is not only good, but above her peers. She should not only be able to survive the confirmation process, but demonstrate that she can go toe-to-toe with the rest of the court.

    I suggest a new requirement for supreme court judges… a legal ‘Battle Royale’. Imagine every justice duking it out in a constitutional bout to show their knowledge of constitional law… The newcomer must triumph over at least one of the current judges to move forward. Ok, I’m kidding of course, but wouldn’t that make for good TV?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>