The American Thinker has a brilliant essay on Harriet Miers.
President Bush is a politician trained in strategic thinking at Harvard Business School, and schooled in tactics by experience and advice, including the experience and advice of his father, whose most lasting political mistake was the nomination of David Souter. The nomination of Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court shows that he has learned his lessons well. Regrettably, a large contingent of conservative commentators does not yet grasp the strategy and tactics at work in this excellent nomination.
There is a doom-and-gloom element on the Right which is just waiting to be betrayed, convinced that their hardy band of true believers will lose by treachery those victories to which justice entitles them. They are stuck in the decades-long tragic phase of conservative politics, when country club Republicans inevitably sold out the faith in order to gain acceptability in the Beltway media and social circuit. Many on the right already are upset with the President already over his deficit spending, and his continued attempts to elevate the tone of politics in Washington in the face of ongoing verbal abuse by Democrats and their media allies. They misinterpret his missing verbal combativeness as weakness.
There is also a palpable hunger for a struggle to the death with hated and verbally facile liberals like Senator Chuck Schumer. Having seen that a brilliant conservative legal thinker with impeccable elite credentials can humble the most officious voices of the Judiciary Committee, they demand a replay. Thus we hear conservatives sniffing that a Southern Methodist University legal education is just too non-Ivy League, adopting a characteristic trope of blue state elitists. We hear conservatives bemoaning a lack of judicial experience, and not a single law review article in the last decade as evidence of a second rate mind.
These critics are playing the Democrats’ game. The GOP is not the party which idolizes Ivy League acceptability as the criterion of intellectual and mental fitness. Nor does the Supreme Court ideally consist of the nine greatest legal scholars of an era. Like any small group, it is better off being able to draw on abilities of more than one type of personality. The Houston lawyer who blogs under the name of Beldar wisely points out that practicing high level law in the real world and rising to co-managing partner of a major law firm not only demonstrates a proficient mind, it provides a necessary and valuable perspective for a Supreme Court Justice, one which has sorely been lacking.
3 thoughts on “Don’t misunderestimate Miers”
Oh, I’m just eating this up. Righties rationalizing Bush’s latest “swing and a miss!” My goodness. After Judge Roberts, what a pale comparison.>>But don’t mind me. I love watching a good (internal) fight.>>Popcorn anyone?
Don’t worry about Howard. >>My question is whether or not you agree with the article. Where do you fall in regards to the Meirs nomination?>>JR
Here’s my take on the Miers nomination. She would not have been my first choice. I think there are other potential candidates I would have rather seen nominated. Having said that I trust the President. The Court is a big issue with him. He would not be nominating someone who he wasn’t convinced would support original constructionism. He has been right on every other judicial nomination. I trust that he knows what he is doing, and I think that conservative opposition to his choice is not helpful. I say, let’s support her and stay unified.
Comments are closed.