Sunday, October 23, 2005

Wow, I Agree with Conservative George Will


From his column in the Washington Post:

Defending The Indefensible

By George F. Will
Sunday, October 23, 2005; Page B07

As Miers's confirmation hearings draw near, her advocates will make an argument that is always false but that they, especially, must make, considering the unusual nature of their nominee. The argument is that it is somehow inappropriate for senators to ask a nominee -- a nominee for a lifetime position making unappealable decisions of enormous social impact -- searching questions about specific Supreme Court decisions and the principles of constitutional law that these decisions have propelled into America's present and future.


To that argument, the obvious and sufficient refutation is: Why, then, have hearings? What, then, remains of the Senate's constitutional role in consenting to nominees?

It is not merely permissible, it is imperative that senators give Miers ample opportunity to refute skeptics by demonstrating her analytic powers and jurisprudential inclinations by discussing recent cases concerning, for example, the scope of federal power under the commerce clause, the compatibility of the First Amendment with campaign regulations and privacy -- including Roe v. Wade .

And Democrats, with their zest for gender politics, need this reminder: To give a woman a seat on a crowded bus because she is a woman is gallantry. To give a woman a seat on the Supreme Court because she is a woman is a dereliction of senatorial duty. It also is an affront to mature feminism, which may bridle at gallantry but should recoil from condescension.

---End of Transmission---

10 comments:

Blake said...

I think Miers may be the first thing in a long time Dems and Republicans of all stripes agree on. Though the logic of that decision is not always the same.

Chris said...

Yeah Will is blasting about this on nearly every column he writes. And I must admit, I do agree with him this time. Will is one of my favorites. I am probably going to link to his article on my site as well.

james said...

Blake:

True, true. She should be DOA at the senate hearings. If she even makes it THAT far!

MJ:

Yeah, he is one of the few con's that I like to read from time to time. Link away my friend!!

Zen Unbound said...

Today, Bush dodged a question about preparations to pull the Miers nomination and launched into a defense of NOT providing White House papers of Miers's. "That's a red line I'm not prepared to cross," he said.

Harriet is likely a very nice lady and a smart, capable lawyer. But she is in way over her head, as Will has written. She is to the Supreme Court what Michael Brown was to FEMA.

It looks to me like Bush is preparing the ground to blaming congress for when he pulls her nomination.

And then the neocons'll get the wingnut nominee of their dreams.

MY PREDICTION: Having once offered up a woman for the post, Bush'll feel free to substitute a white guy. On Oct 27, Miers is dead meat and Michael McConnell is the new nominee. In the Sunday, Oct. 30 papers, we'll see a political cartoon with Miers dressed as a witch and McConnell as a ghoul.

james said...

Tom:

Yeah, she is the Michael Brown of SCOTUS candidates. I bet you're right now that the neo-con's will nominate after her their wing-nut of choice. Nuclear option?

Zen Unbound said...

James,

You know, I'm wondering if it was some Bush-Cheney-Rove-Satan scheme from the beginning to sacrafice a loser -- Miers, that Majority leader Reid had OK'd -- in order to try to smooth the way for using the nuclear option on the nutjob they really wanted.

The Bunch in the White House doesn't do anything in a straightforward way when there is a cynical, duplicitous, devious method they can try.

Zen Unbound said...

My prediction [see the 4th post in this comments thread] is looking pretty good this morning.

james said...

Tom:

WoW!!! You hit it right on the head! Can you predict the Powerball numbers?? If so, will you split some of it with me?! :)

Zen Unbound said...

Sure James. Everyone who wins Powerball gets their numbers from me.

I'm awaiting the announcement of GWB's next nom for the Court. When it turns out to be McConnell, I'm having myself declared A GOD!

A Slate story this morning says "a replacement nomination—which officials say may be announced as soon as tomorrow—gives Bush an opportunity to change the story line of conflict inside the GOP. A new choice the right applauds may bring the fractured party back into line. 'If he chooses a solid conservative, this is the opportunity he needs to shore up the base on the one issue that unites all,' says a senior Republican strategist."

james said...

Tom:

I think you're right that the next nom will help bring the R base back together.