Wednesday, October 5, 2005

Yet Another Winning Pick

Up until now, I have thought of the Supreme Court nominations as an annoying non-issue. Anyone who thought Bush was going to get through two terms without having the opportunity to fill at least one vacancy on the court was dreaming (or thinking wishfully….) Reagan’s two terms allowed him to place two justices, and elevate a Chief Justice. Bill Clinton’s eight years in office netted him two nominees for the bench. Even George H.W. Bush got to place two justices during his single term in office.

My only opinion on the issue was that it would go a long way toward healing the cavernous rift between the right and the left for the opposition to just suck it up and let Mr. Bush have his crack at it. And, darned if he didn’t make me look good with his first nominee. Judge Roberts is a bright, respected jurist, who has demonstrated a clear love for and understanding of the law. His ties to the Bush dynasty, in the form of his White House service during the Bush 1 Administration, faded in the bright light of his obvious intelligence and competence (perhaps we were dazzled to insensibility that a Bush nominee should possess either of these qualities…)

The Democrats must have shared some of my personal philosophy. They allowed Judge Roberts to glide through the confirmation process with only the meekest of token objections. Perhaps they even patted themselves on the back for their wise application of the "pick your battles" adage. I’ll confess I had my hand right in there thumping with the rest of them.

Apparently, Mr. Bush was much heartened by his victory in the Senate. He must have figured he was on a roll. He fired up that same smoke screen that worked the first time—the one that had him closeting himself with Congressional leaders of both parties in an earnest quest for the perfect candidate. He carried Judge O’Connor’s glass slipper far and wide, searching for the one individual who could fill it perfectly. And, lo and behold, that one ideal candidate was right under his nose all along. Harriet Mier, his own Texas lawyer!

It amazes me that Bush actually had the cajones to put forth Mier’s name, after the recent firestorm surrounding another of his cronies—FEMA’s woefully incompetent Michael Brown. But our Texas good ole boy president understands the concept of "staying the course;" he doggedly defends every poor choice he’s made, and turns a blank stare to any criticism thereof.

So, Mr. Bush searches the world, and ends up pulling another unqualified sycophant out of his drawers. This one, unfortunately, has the potential to leave a remnant of the Bush Administration stink in Washington for at least another two decades.  Not an attractive thought to those of us who are wearily counting the days to the end of this disastrous administration. If I were a senator, I’d have to give this one a long, hard look. I have a feeling deep in my gut that there is way more danger here than initially meets the eye.


  1. Call me naive, but I thought a Supreme Court Justice nominee should at least be a judge... silly me!

  2. I agree with your intuitions completely.
    And while I agree that there is some very deep sh--t involved here, I must tell you that your poop color background made your journal entry very hard to read. Maybe make the font color white?
    Anyhow, don't know if you give a rat's behind or not, but I am nominating you for best political journal.  Hope you'll visit my journal one of these days, as well.

  3. When I first heard about Miers, I thought croneyism again.  When I started reading about her background, I softened a bit, just a bit.  She's one of the few people in the Bush administration who hasn't just been a yes man and has disagreed with both him and her former immediate supervisor, Gonzales.  I was furious that she hadn't been a judge yet, but then I read that 35 other Supreme Court justices hadn't served as judges before their nominations, including Rehnquist. One of my biggest worries came from charges of corruption when she led the Texas lottery.  Two firings and two civil lawsuits, if I remember correctly, both of them settled. So I'm wary, suspicious but willing to cut a little slack and see what comes up.  Quite frankly, I'm surprised no one from the extreme right hasn't started saying she's a lesbian because she's never been married.  I definitely want to follow this one.

  4. So I take it you're not pleased with this nominee, lol.  Kidding.  Seriously, I have to read more about her to even make an informed decision.  

  5. I have to admit to being impressed with Roberts, unwillingly.
    But this ladylike throwback....

  6. I'm not sure what to make of this nominee. I'd prefer someone with more experience.  The ultra conservatives aren't happy. I guess that's something. But, you know he's not picking the best and brightest.


  7. The Church Lady from Saturday Night Live comes to my mind.

  8. you can never tell.   earl warren was an eisenhower appointee ... conservative ex-governor of california.    he was responsible in large part for confining japanese-american citizens in concentration camps in WWII

  9. "pulling another unqualified sycophant out of his drawers" Do you really think she's been in his drawers? I'm surprised he'd risk it, after what happened with Bill and Monica.

    Nice color scheme. Does this also serve as the Cleveland Browns homepage?

  10. I guess with Laura wanting a woman and all, we can only conclude there just aren't any brilliant female judges anywhere to be found.  Seriously, it will be interesting to follow the confirmation hearings and find out more.  I agree that it's good she appears to lean to moderate--contributed to Gore's campaign!  Maybe that was a plot.  I keep thinking of that West Wing episode where they compromise with one conservative nominee and one liberal nominee who respect each others' differences and get along.   *debbi*

  11. "So, Mr. Bush searches the world, and ends up pulling another unqualified sycophant out of his drawers."
    Now, that's a great line!  Pulling a sycophant out of his drawers.  Is that something like pulling a rabbit out of his hat?  :-)