« Not Gonna Happen | Main | Miers' Timing »

October 27, 2005

Miers Withdrawn!

Here the Prez's statement:

Today, I have reluctantly accepted Harriet Miers' decision to withdraw her nomination to the Supreme Court of the United States.

I nominated Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court because of her extraordinary legal experience, her character, and her conservative judicial philosophy. Throughout her career, she has gained the respect and admiration of her fellow attorneys. She has earned a reputation for fairness and total integrity. She has been a leader and a pioneer in the American legal profession. She has worked in important positions in state and local government and in the bar. And for the last five years, she has served with distinction and honor in critical positions in the Executive Branch.

I understand and share her concern, however, about the current state of the Supreme Court confirmation process. It is clear that Senators would not be satisfied until they gained access to internal documents concerning advice provided during her tenure at the White House - disclosures that would undermine a President's ability to receive candid counsel. Harriet Miers' decision demonstrates her deep respect for this essential aspect of the Constitutional separation of powers - and confirms my deep respect and admiration for her.

I am grateful for Harriet Miers' friendship and devotion to our country. And I am honored that she will continue to serve our Nation as White House Counsel.

My responsibility to fill this vacancy remains. I will do so in a timely manner.

This is a product of the President's massive political weakness right now. With a majority in both houses of Congress, he was unable to choose and confirm his favored justice, and was in fact so badly beaten as to withdraw her before she ever entered the committee. Now the question is whether he decides to reunite the right wing around a crazed wingnut or go for another stealthy, but this time qualified, pick, a la John Roberts. What do you guys think?

October 27, 2005 | Permalink

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
https://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c572d53ef00d83493024369e2

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Miers Withdrawn!:

Comments

I'm thinking rightwing fascist nominee to get the extreme right back on board before the trial of the century. I'm also contemplating moving to Mars to get away from it all.

Posted by: Andrew | Oct 27, 2005 10:11:34 AM

As a libertarian, Bush's political weakness here was not the Democrat's doing, it was his own. The conservatives jumped ship on this nominee, and frankly people like myself, who voted for him based solely on the facts that 1) I support the war and 2) Kerry was even worse than Bush, smelled blood in the water on this nomination from day 1.

The Democrats, I think, were hoping that Republicans would fight it out between ourselves, but that eventually Miers would make it through. She'd have been much more kind to your policies than the next nominee will.

Now, if things go the way I'd like to see, you're going to have to deal with Janice Rogers Brown. And you'll see a party unified behind Bush if that nomination comes down.

Posted by: Brad Warbiany | Oct 27, 2005 11:31:39 AM

"This is a product of the President's massive political weakness right now."

Wrong!

Even if Bush was politically strong at the time of Miers nomination, there would have been an uproar from the conservative base. I bet Bush's job approval goes up significantly in the next pol, unless he makes another bad nomination.

The conservative base doesn't walk in lockstep with Republican leaders.

I hope he nominates Janice Rogers Brown.

Posted by: Captain Toke | Oct 27, 2005 11:56:35 AM

Gallup released a poll yesterday that said that 55% of respondents would vote for "any Democrat" over Bush, and that fewer than 40% responded that they would consider voting for Bush again. He's not doing well.
Of course the wingnuts (and alleged "Libertarians") are jonesing for a wingnut nominee. Bush may feel like he has no other choice - he must be running out of close allies and good ol' boys from home to pick over.

Posted by: sprocket | Oct 27, 2005 12:23:52 PM

The dems definitely sat back on this one. And rightfully so. There was no reason for them to make a fuss about it. Let the republicans duke it out and make what they want about the pres and his choice. The dems could have simply voted no, in which they would have lost, or abstained. There would be no reason to vote yes on suspicion that the next nominee would be worse.

Posted by: Adrock | Oct 27, 2005 12:36:42 PM

That whole "next time make it Janice Rodgers Brown" (which is big at Lucianne.com, too) is such a non-starter it's almost funny. And sticking to it underlines that conservatives haven't yet learned the lesson of Miers.

Which is, never mind the Democrats, there's no way to satisfy Republicans. And that means Bush needs a cautious, safe pcik that some moderate Dems might cross over for, not some firebrand who will definitely get full Dem opposition and peel off the moderate (what they call RINO) northeastern Senators.

I'd point out that Democrats are looking at a pretty darn good combination of events - it might have been nice to see Miers flop through hearings, but at some point, some Dem would have had to say just how lousy she was, and that would have taken some heat off of the George Allens and Lindsay Grahams. Instead, Miers has flamed out, clearly due to intraparty displeasure, and Dems have, indeed, "kept their powder dry" as we've long wished. That dry powder means something. And partly it means extra credibility if the next nominee is a nut (i.e. Janice Rodgers Brown).

I'd expect a conventional, safe choice - Karen Williams, Moira Corrigan, the two Ediths, maybe one of the white men, although that's bound to raise issues about "the O'Connor seat" that will be messy. I'd say a conservative woman, extablished judge, not too extreme and not much paper. And maybe it won't be too painful. But I bet it will be painful, and messy, if only because Miers has made Bush and his PR style touchable.

Posted by: weboy | Oct 27, 2005 1:45:47 PM

Adrock,
No doubt, the Dems have played this, from a political standpoint, beautifully. Some on the right thought that this nomination was Bush's attempt to draw out the left and cause them to expend their ammunition. But we, on the right, beat you to it. And now Harry Reid is playing the card that we on the right couldn't take "moderate" nominee, which means the Dems will come out in force against a true originalist.

Bush dropped the ball on Miers, and has made his job for the next nominee harder, not easier. But he's certainly set the stage for a fight, and after Miers, he's going to have solid support from his base if he nominates someone like Brown, Edith Jones, Luttig, etc. And with a 55-44 lead in the Senate, it might be a winnable fight.

sprocket,
I might be an "alleged" libertarian to you, but the one thing I think standing in Janice Rogers Brown's way is that she's more of a libertarian than a social conservative, which might be a negative in Bush's eyes. I have never seen eye to eye with the social conservatives in the Bush camp, and while most libertarians tend to align with republicans at the ballot box, it's a coalition towards sometimes similar goals, not necessarily a "friendship". With Republicans' recent turn away from fiscal discipline, the split between libertarians and Republicans is growing wider every day.

Posted by: Brad Warbiany | Oct 27, 2005 1:53:34 PM

Brad, you wrote - The Democrats, I think, were hoping that Republicans would fight it out between ourselves, but that eventually Miers would make it through. She'd have been much more kind to your policies than the next nominee will.

It appeared that by using the word "ourselves" that you were outing yourself as a Republican.

No biggie. Carry on.

Posted by: sprocket | Oct 27, 2005 2:37:55 PM

It almost seems like JR Brown is a boogeyman to the left. I have seen nothing she has written that can be construed "right wing extremist". Without any "extremist" past it is going to be hard for the left to villify a black, female, self made, sharecropper's daughter in the eyes of the country. Especially after they just confirmed her to the federal bench.

I wouldn't mind seeing Luttig or Owens nominated either.

Posted by: Captain Toke | Oct 27, 2005 2:49:31 PM

Toke,
You don't think she's an extremist? Well then... See what the People for the American Way has compiled: a list of her own quotes from speeches/etc.

She's very extreme. She actually thinks that the Constitution doesn't grant the federal government the power to act on whatever whim Congress finds. She thinks the words "regulate Commerce between the States" means that Congress doesn't have the power to regulate any activity it sees fit, even if, like in Raich, that activity isn't even commerce. She takes the narrow view of "provide for the general welfare". She believes in the right to keep and bear arms, as well as the rights of private property (no Kelo will get by her!)...

I've said before that Janice Rogers Brown, compared to most of the current mainstream, would be a radical extremist. And so am I. But when the "mainstream" is unconstitutional, believing in the idea that the Constitution is supposed to limit the power of the government is pretty extreme.

(I warn any libertarian reading this. If you read Brown's quotes in the top link from People For the American Way, you just might fall in love with her. Consider yourself warned)

Posted by: Brad Warbiany | Oct 27, 2005 4:31:01 PM

A great read, very informative
Been looking for a blog like this one for a while
Keep up the good work.


----------------------------------
http://www.penisenlargementforyou.net

Posted by: BigJohnmmme | Aug 24, 2007 2:34:09 AM

A great read, very informative
Been looking for a site like this one for a while
Keep up the good work.


----------------------------------
http://www.penisenlargementforyou.net

Posted by: BigJohnmmme | Aug 24, 2007 3:48:19 AM

The comments to this entry are closed.