WASHINGTON, Oct. 4 - President Bush on Tuesday defended his latest choice for the Supreme Court, Harriet E. Miers, from complaints on the right that she was not conservative enough and from accusations on the left that she was a White House crony unqualified for the job.
The president also said he did not recall ever talking to Ms. Miers, whom he has known for more than a decade, about her personal views on abortion, and he reiterated that he was a "pro-life president" who nonetheless had no litmus test on the issue for judicial candidates.
He insisted that Congress and the American public would come to be impressed with Ms. Miers, the White House counsel and a former president of the State Bar of Texas who was once Mr. Bush's personal lawyer.
"I can understand people not, you know, knowing Harriet," the president said in a 55-minute news conference in the Rose Garden at the White House, designed in large part to bolster Ms. Miers's position as many conservatives remained agitated about the choice the day after she was selected. "She hasn't been, you know, one of those publicity hounds. She's been somebody who just quietly does her job."
The president, who appeared at ease during the news conference but intent on pressing his case for Ms. Miers's nomination, added: "But when she does it, she performs, see. She's not a person in Texas saying: 'Look at me. Look at how stellar I have been.' She just did it, and quietly, and quietly established an incredibly strong record."
But some of the most important parts of that record might remain largely off-limits, as President Bush indicated that he would probably reject any requests for documents relating to her work as White House counsel.
So we're suppose to take President Bush's word that Miers is the right candidate for the Supreme Court, even though she doesn't have a judicial record, and the White House will not release any documents regarding her work as White House counsel. And of course, the president doesn't even recall ever talking to Miers about social issues that may have come up during their relationship.
In some ways, I'm just dumbfounded by how this administration works. Yes, Miers is the perfect stealth candidate--virtually unknown in the public, having no paper trail, and thus providing no way for Senate Democrats to understand how she thinks. And what paper trail there is in her work as White House counsel, will be blocked by President Bush, citing executive privilege. She is not a constitutional scholar, an intellectual, nor does she have any experience as a judge--on either the state or federal level. And when the confirmation hearings take place, she'll employ the same strategy as Roberts did, refusing to answer questions regarding their views on issues by saying these issues may come up in future court cases. She was once a Democrat, who switched to Republican. She's a born-again Christian--very similar to Bush. It seems that the only qualifications that she has for the court is that she worked for Bush, and that Bush says she's a hard worker.
I don't buy it.
There've been other rumors going around through the blogosphere that I'll touch upon. Of course, the big one is that President Bush selected Miers due to her loyalty to him. And his selection of Miers to the Court is a reward for her services--prompting charges of cronyism from both liberal and conservative factions. We've seen this cronyism before with Bush's selection of Michael Brown to FEMA--even though Brown had no experience in disaster planning (Although he can put on a good horse show). I've also heard other stories that Miers was picked to keep Bush out of any criminal or impeachment proceedings if the Democrats take control of Congress and start digging into all the scandals of the past five years. This may be a possibility, considering Miers could continue to profess her loyalty to Bush even after she is placed on the Court.
The problem I have is that I don't know who this Miers is. I listen to Bush saying that she's qualified, but I also look at the evidence of the president selecting people to top federal jobs based on loyalty and not on qualifications. The cronyism is real and continues on. I look at Miers and see a virtual unknown with no paper trail, and the White House refusing to provide any documents regarding her work. I see the right wing-nuts saying Miers is not conservative enough. I see Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid professing wonderful praise for the president's selection of Miers--which makes me wonder if the Democrats are going to lie down and die on this selection. I don't see the Democrats starting to fight against the White House over viewing the documents that Miers worked on as White House counsel--and if anything, the Democrats should filibuster this court nominee until the White House releases the documents because Miers has a non-existent paper trail. I see conservatives saying that she's not right-wingnut enough, so now there's a fight raging within the Republican Party over Miers.
A very dangerous turn of events.
No comments:
Post a Comment