Monday, October 10, 2005

Miers is Not a Conservative...

Read the emails that Michelle Malkin is getting. One in particular stands out for me:
There are some claiming that those of us opposing the Miers nomination are elitists. Not only is the claim simply wrong, it shows that those using the claim aginst us have no good arguments in favor of the nomination and are resorting to name calling. You know your opponents have lost the argument when the best they can do is call you names.
I was one of the grass roots volunteers working my butt off for the President's reelection. Among those I worked with on the campaign, there was no issue that was more important than appointing the absolute best people to the Supreme Court. Never once did I hear a list of elitist qualifications or anything of the sort. The discussions always centered on picking candidates in whom we could have confidence and fight for.
It feels like I've gotten kicked in the teeth, and the guy who kicked me, along with his best buddies, are telling me I'm a jerk for not enjoying it. What's worse is that I think they actually believe I am a jerk for not enjoying it.
Michelle also notes that Polipundit has changed his mind about Miers, and is now opposing her nomination:
Since her nomination was announced, I’ve said that Harriet Miers should be confirmed to the Supreme Court, despite her unexciting qualifications, because she’s a conservative. Information that has come out over the last week has caused me to believe she is not a conservative. So I’m changing my position: Harriet Miers should not be confirmed by the Senate.
On Roe v. Wade, I have no doubt that Miers is a rock-solid pro-lifer. If this were the only issue that mattered, then Miers would have my full support.
But there are any number of other issues before the Court, foremost among them the racial discrimination that goes on in the name of affirmative action. On these issues, Miers would at best be a squishy liberal like Justice O’Connor.
David Frum at National Review has been blogging a lot on Miers recently (probably to keep up with Professor Bainbridge), and notes that Miers has a devotion to the ideal of "diversity." He also posts some reader email which is very illuminating. An excerpt:
I voted for Reagan in 1980 and have voted Republican ever since, I knocked on doors for Coleman and Rep Kennedy here in Minnesota. But today I cannot tell you how disappointed I am in Bush's selection. She is a solitary workaholic like Souter, and even though I am a Evangelical Christian, I find it patronizing to have the White House and Hewitt sell her on her religious devotion. I want the sharpest legal mind available for the Court.Sen. Graham told those of us who object to the nomination to Shut Up. Ok, will; I will also stay home for the midterm elections. I feel the GOP establishment is holding its voters, you know, the folks who put them in power, in contempt.

Redstate summarizes the Sunday talk shows involving Miers, which involved, among others, Pat Buchanan, Senator Lindsey "Shut Up" Graham, Gary Bauer, and Senator Chuck Schumer

John Hawkins over at RightWingNews posts the results of a poll he conducted among right of center bloggers. It's not good news for Miers, but whether it will make a difference is another matter entirely. Scroll down for further commentary on Miers and elitism, and for an excerpt from an article which notes that Miers unliaterally watered down the President's message on Christmas because she thought it was offensive (again showing a disturbing attachment to "diversity").

After writing an article in the Washington Post on the right-leaning blogosphere's reaction to Miers, Captain Ed has an update noting that while lack of GOP support could damage Miers, Democrats might drag her across the finish line because she's the best they could hope to get. But this means that the Democrats would have to gamble on her position on Roe v. Wade as well, which is something they might not be willing to do.

No comments: