Comments on: Harriet Miers: Upon Further Review, Still Mediocre

By: x

Sun, 16 Oct 2005 20:56:02 +0000

i think that she isnt a good selection. this is so she has no experience what so ever. She cant contribute anything to the other justices or the fellow americans. The senate is sure to improve her appointment just for the fact she is of a nominee of Bush , and everyone knows Bush gets what he wants.

By: Media Lies

Media Lies — Sat, 15 Oct 2005 05:04:20 +0000

Should I declare open war on Miers opponents?

Maybe I will, because I am sick and tired of the condescension and yes, sexism, and yes, elitism being displayed by some.

J...

By: A Knight’s Blog » The 76th Fed

A Knight’s Blog » The 76th Fed — Wed, 05 Oct 2005 12:31:18 +0000

[...] Several bloggers (i.e. Poliblogger here and here, Lawrence Solum, James Joyner, and Randy Barnett of the Volokh Conspiracy in the WSJ) have noted the following text of Federalist No. 76: To what purpose then require the co-operation of the Senate? I answer, that the necessity of their concurrence would have a powerful, though, in general, a silent operation. It would be an excellent check upon a spirit of favoritism in the President, and would tend greatly to prevent the appointment of unfit characters from State prejudice, from family connection, from personal attachment, or from a view to popularity. [...]

By: ACSBlog: The Blog of the American Constitution Society

ACSBlog: The Blog of the American Constitution Society — Wed, 05 Oct 2005 12:30:08 +0000

Barnett- "Alexander Hamilton wouldn't approve of Justice Harriet Miers" Boston University Law Professor Randy Barnett, in an op-ed published in the Wall Street Journal, suggests that the nomination of Harriet Miers would not receive Alexander Hamilton's stamp of approval. Citing the use of Federalist No. 65--defining an i...

By: Ira

Ira — Tue, 04 Oct 2005 21:52:00 +0000

Much of the "first woman to do" stuff almost makes me think of Hillary Clinton, except we don't have anything like "the first woman to be made a partner in the law firm, right around the time her husband was elected governor..." Bush has done plenty of things I don't care for (eg, making nice with Sen Chivas Regal (D-Mass) to get the 'No Child left Behind" thing passed), but I am willing to give him the benifit of the doubt on this. After all, he could have passed over Rice to find another Colin Powell for Sec of State, etc.

By: Sal

Sal — Tue, 04 Oct 2005 20:47:36 +0000

I think Harriet Mier could well be a great choice. From the commentary made about her it's apparent that she's been the "first woman in Texas to..." more than once, may be even enough times to get on a 'top nine' list somewhere. She's tight lipped, tough, inspires loyalty and can compromise if that's the rational thing to do. We certainly need more women on this bench. The fact that Rush Limbaugh is 'disappointed' is a big plus for her in my book.

By: PoliBlog: Politics is the Master Science

PoliBlog: Politics is the Master Science — Tue, 04 Oct 2005 20:35:32 +0000

On Harriet Miers

Yesterday was hectic and most of today has been occupied with matters of more immediate import than daily politics, hence I have not had to time to fully address the Harriet Miers nomination.
I am not pleased with the nomination, although couldn̵...

By: Jim Durbin

Jim Durbin — Tue, 04 Oct 2005 18:06:41 +0000

She could be a female Scalia and it would still be disappointing.

Bush lost an opportunity to focus the debate on where the country should head - and it is doubtful he will get another chance before the 2006 elections.

I'm wondering if maybe the catcalls of having an out-of-touch, arrogant CEO president who never really supported conservatives and relies too much on loyalty and his personal instincts on people are the simplest answer.

The belief that this is some Rovian plot can't cover all exigencies.

Bush did what he wanted to do - because he wanted to do it.

He's no John Kerry - but he's not someone conservatives should back fully. What has he accomplished? He's governed to the left of Clinton and may well cost the Republicans the Congress in the next three years.

Then we get another Clinton, who stacks the court with liberals - and what is his legacy then?

Disappointing this president is.

By: Conservative Outpost

Conservative Outpost — Tue, 04 Oct 2005 15:24:15 +0000

Harriet Miers: The Day After Well, now that everyone's had a good night's sleep, (I trust), some opinions have softened (upon new information on the nominee) and others haven't. Lifelike Pundits has a dream of Miers ripping into Senate libs Patrick Ruffini creates a "Coalition...

By: Fersboo

Fersboo — Tue, 04 Oct 2005 13:21:14 +0000

The wonderful thing about this presidency is the way everyone thinks the President has made some error, just to find out later that the decision isn't quite as dire as predicted. There have been a number of unknowns brought forward by the President, not including Mr. Rumsfield's 'unknown unknowns', and they have performed quite well, IMHO.