Harriet Miers Sexuality Being Questioned

Well, that didn't take long.

I'm not concerned about her sexuality, I'm concerned about her positions as regards the Law. I heard her briefly and she seemed to be taking a somewhat conservative tone with her word choice - something like, upholding the law and the constitution and limiting the role of judges in society. Starting off on that note suggests they know they are going to have to sell her to the right.

I'm not sure I'm buying, personally. There were some genuine heavyweights out there with a strong constructionist Constitutional bent and I'm assuming we have another stealth candidate here with less credentials or sign posts than Roberts. If that's the case, it seems the President has joined the legislature in playing defense. That's generally a losing strategy if you want to win the game.

Were all these Republicans asleep through the Reagan years? I should add a caveat though. Bush has worked closely with her for a number of years and should know her core beliefs - it is possible she's the perfect nominee for conservatives. But with some notable past disappointments, I'm not sure I want to wait and see.

Lastly, the most troubling bit of all may be that she looks just a little like Helen Thomas - and that probably scares me more than anything.

Comments

[cathy]

I am underwhelmed and disgusted...it seems to me that Laura made this decision. When you think about the fact that Bush had a real chance to make a difference IMO with this nomination he choked. My first clue that this is not a good pick was Chuckie Schumer immediately on the news glotting that the president listened and picked someone they could work with. As it usually goes, if Chuckie and Hillary are happy most of us normal people are not happy. I don't object to her sexuality, I do object to the fact that most professional women nowadays are married and have children and have a full time job and still run the household...This is life in the real world..if she devoted her life to her career what does she really know about anything...what when.. she goes home does she open a tv dinner and feed the cat and then relax. Working women in this country don't even have time to make a proper visit to the little girls room...let alone relax. I guess Bush is worrying about his legacy. He must want to be thought of as a centrist and he is now flipping the bird to that wonderful conservative christian base who helped him get reelected. I guess he showed them how easily they can be used. The other thing is...how many much more qualifed women were there in Washington. Women who were close to the kind of person Roberts is perceived to be. What happened to them..what, the president has suddenly started reading the polls....he doesn't want any controversy...I am disgusted...really disgusted...this will go down in history as bush's seminal moment...i can hear the histroy teachers twenty years from now saying "this is the moment where the president, wrote the pages of his history book into oblivion"

[TheAlamo]

I'm not sure I'm buying, personally. There were some genuine heavyweights out there with a strong constructionist Constitutional bent and I'm assuming we have another stealth candidate here with less credentials or sign posts than Roberts. If that's the case, it seems the President has joined the legislature in playing defense. That's generally a losing strategy if you want to win the game.

Gosh Dan....how come they have to play defense when they are the majority party? It is a game. We have heard time and time again, how the "conservatives" are playing "defense"...to what? Even Limbaugh alludes to this nonsense.

Possibly they are in collusion? Possibly we are heading down the wrong road because the "leaders" are together in this?
How much longer are we going to excuse these fake "conservatives?"

It is like they say..., if it rolls in the mud, and makes oinking sounds....it is usually a pig!

[tester]

What a joke.

This looks more like jury selection than supreme court staffing.

I suppose if a complete moron can be president, bench time shouldn't be a requirement to be a supreme court justice.

[cathy]

ooh i am so angry...well she headed the lottery commission...wow what a big and important job...and she won the biggest lottery of her life..Bush has let down all women...there are women of substance, with the education, not so old, with the experience, who have guts who are almost the equal of Roberts..this is a total sham.....so angry, so angry...disgusted..she may be a woman but jeez...what a total lightweight...

[cathy]

President Bush on November 17 named Harriet Miers as White House counsel, a position she will hold upon the Senate confirmation of Alberto Gonzales -- current White House counsel -- as U.S. Attorney General.

Most recently, Miers served as Assistant to the President and Staff Secretary. Prior to that, she was Co-Managing Partner at Locke Liddell & Sapp, LLP. Previously, she was President of Locke, Purnell, Rain & Harrell, where she worked from 1972 until 1999. From 1995 until 2000, she was chair of the Texas Lottery Commission. In 1992, Harriet became the first woman president of the Texas State Bar, and in 1985 she became the first woman president of the Dallas Bar Association. She also served as a Member-At-Large on the Dallas City Council. Harriet received both her undergraduate and law degrees from Southern Methodist University.

(White House Biography)

http://usinfo.state.gov/special/transition/transition_nominees/miers.html

pedestrian comes to mind

[tester]

I think Drudge is going to blow a vessel.

"BUSH COURT PICK GAVE MONEY TO GORE?"

This must be the "angle".

So are democrats supposed to overlook her lack of experience, just because she was a democrat a long time ago?

[usmcmom]

Bush has let down all women...there are women of substance, with the education, not so old, with the experience, who have guts who are almost the equal of Roberts..this is a total sham.....so angry, so angry...disgusted..she may be a woman but jeez...what a total lightweight...

Posted by: cathy | Oct 3, 2005 11:32:58 AM

Couldn't have said it any better.... I was so hoping for Janice Rogers Brown... now that is a woman that would kick butt during the Senate confirmation hearings and do a fantastic job at SCOTUS.

[TexasGal]

I suppose if a complete moron can be president, bench time shouldn't be a requirement to be a supreme court justice.

Posted by: tester
And there it is in a nutshell.

[absynth_minded]

Hell, if the ex-head of FEMA can watch horses screw for a living?????

[Northerner]

If raising Arabian horses qualifies you for a post as director of FEMA, why should the lack of any experience as a judge disqualify you for the Supreme Court? I mean, after the raging success of Michael Brown, it is about time for another appointment "out of the blue".
Let's face it, in today's America, all you need to do to aspire to high political office (or politically-appointed office) is kiss the right behinds and/or donate a million bucks to the GOP. Experience not required, usually even discouraged. Why, if people in those positions actually knew what they were doing, they might start disagreeing with old Dubya, and we can't have that, can we?

[cosmicmojo]

"Hell, if the ex-head of FEMA can watch horses screw for a living?????
Posted by: absynth_minded | Oct 3, 2005 12:17:43 PM"

Well said and witty! i was thinking the same thing, but nothing so funny.

[Jack]

We elected Bush to overturn Roe v Wade. 35 million of us did, at least. We were willing to overlook his reckless foreign policy adventures (of which many of us are quietly critical) and his fiscal imprudence because we trusted, or wanted to trust him, on moral issues.

We in the heartland have been sold a bill of goods. We need a 3rd party. The Republican Party is not our party. We've given them chance and chance again, and they have proven to be nothing but self-serving amoralites who care more about being in power than doing good.

[moey]

Posted by Jack Oct 3, 2005 1:41

Jack: I don't believe that the Supreme Court will overturn Roe. It might modify it as far as partial birth abortion or children's notification, but I think Roe is and will continue to be the law. IMO

I am very surprised at the nomination, I just can't figure out what the strategy is. As others have stated, there are very strong women candidates out there, why this particular one ??????

[Ronald Proby]

We have to think in terms of thse congressional FBI records forwarded to the the Clinton Whitehouse a few hears ago. Bush's absurd second choice for a High Court nominee is either motivated by the anti GOP info in those FBI files or Bush is even dumber that his off-the-cuff speaches time and time again have shown him to be. My hunch? There is definitely some coersive force in play here.

[absynth_minded]

Why not nominate Judge fricken Judy?????

Seriously, she's more qualified and she'd tell some people, Bush included, where to stick it.

It would be nice to see (IF ONLY ONCE) someone make a decision that is going to benefit our country. A decision that isn't motivated by party lines or other ulterior motives.

It's bad enough that our country is as jacked-up as it is, but these nominations will possibly be the most important part of the legacy that jackass leaves.

[frank]

Lastly, the most troubling bit of all may be that she looks just a little like Helen Thomas - and that probably scares me more than anything.

Posted by Dan in Politics | Permalink

Great pun because I was going to say this is going to get ugly.

[cathy]

It would be nice to see (IF ONLY ONCE) someone make a decision that is going to benefit our country. A decision that isn't motivated by party lines or other ulterior motives.

yeah, what happened to great statesmen/stateswomen, men/women of coviction, men/women of character,people who don't live and die by the polls, people who are not afraid of controversy and a good debate in the interests of the country...where are the leaders? Nowadays, does everyone have a couple of skeletons in their closet? when you are a small child your momma tells you that there are some times in your life when you just have to do what is right even if you are standing alone, even if noone is watching...times where character becomes crucial and moral fiber and courage are the rule of the day...is there anyone left in public service who remembers their momma giving this speech?

[!]

SO WHAT....She will do a fine job !
Damed if you do , damned if you don't. You can please some of the people some of the time but you can't please all the people all of the time.
Do not know what some of you people want in a judge or what you want them to stand for. Probably your own secret agenda. LOL

She is just as damn good as anyone else !

[TheAlamo]

Do not know what some of you people want in a judge or what you want them to stand for. Probably your own secret agenda. LOL

She is just as damn good as anyone else !

Posted by: ! | Oct 3, 2005 6:55:10 PM

Stand for?
That's simple. The UN-ABRIDGED Constitution of the United States of America. If you find one like that, let us know!

[Stef]

WTF??

"She isn't a good choice because she doesn't have any children?"

So friggin' what!! At least she has her priorities straight. As a woman it's damned if you will, damned if you don't!! Condie Rice doesn't have kids, yet she has a distinguished career. Karen Hughes has kids, she has a distinguished career as well. It shouldn't matter if a woman is a "Mom" or isn't, at least in the working world. Miers isn't nominated as secretary of daycare workers, she's nominated as a Supreme Court Justice...

I can agree w/her never being a judge coming into question though...Although I do think that she's qualified enough. A few other justices weren't judges while nominated (Renquist comes to mind) although it didn't happen recently.

This whole "but a woman isn't a real woman if she didn't juggle work/marriage/motherhood/soccer practices/PTA" meme stinks, IMO, and is a slap in the face to all women who decided to forgo having kids for their careers, women who decided to stay at home to raise their kids instead of a career and women who would've loved having children but through no fault of their own couldn't...

(And it seems to be mostly Liberals who would find fault w/Miers for being a career woman w/o children. Sigh...)

[CosmicMojo]

Why on earth would liberals fault her for not having kids? That makes no sense. You have no clue about what liberals value.

It's traditional fundamentalist conservatives that think women should stay at home and watch the kids.

Liberals think women should have a choice and this Ms. Mires has made a choice. Good for her. Doubt I'll like her politics, but I dont' begrudge her the right to make her own career and family choices.

PS-- I don't thinks she's gay based on her lobbying against gay rights.