Be Happy and Look Forward
As recriminations continue to fly, it’s worth noting that Miers’s prep sessions were not going well:
For Harriet Miers, the “murder boards” were aptly named. Day after day in a room in the White House complex, colleagues from the Bush administration grilled her on constitutional law, her legal background and her past speeches in practice sessions meant to mimic Senate hearings.
Her uncertain, underwhelming responses left her confirmation managers so disturbed they decided not to open up the sessions to the friendly outside lawyers they usually invite to participate in prepping key nominees.
Pro-Miers forces should stop and consider whether maybe — just maybe — we Miers critics were actually correct: Miers was simply out of her depth. Stopping this train wreck early saved Republican Senators from having to make the agonizing decision to oppose her in a very public way.
And, after all, the President had a choice whether to accept her withdrawal. As Jonathan V. Last notes, shouldn’t we trust that he made the right decision? Especially since Harriet Miers was not the top choice for any of you former Miers supporters?
So: can you folks stop with the recriminations and join my call to look to the future?
A very interesting tidbit from The Boston Globe:
“McClellan said Miers called the president at 8:30 p.m. Wednesday to tell him she intended to withdraw. But White House aides working on her nomination did not seem to know; at 11:40 Wednesday night, eight large boxes were delivered to the Judiciary Committee, containing a supplemental questionnaire from Miers and documents from her previous work in the private sector.”
Neil J. Lehto (77bed1) — 10/28/2005 @ 7:55 amWhy do I squint at the whole Miers episode and see the fine hand of a shrewd chessmaster? Consider:
-Harriet bowed out with an ‘undisclosable documents’ excuse. Face-saving at the very least, she will enjoy a significant boost to the ol’ resume… after all ‘nominated to the Supreme Court’, isn’t going to hurt her career at all.
-The Right is now re-energized and WILL confirm a good, solid, conservative nominee.
-The timing of the whole thing completely gutted the impact of the Plame nonsense, focusing all of the attention on the White House.
…and this was a ‘bad week’?
I think that the Left has been completely set up. Watch for the knockdown.
heldmyw (a999cd) — 10/28/2005 @ 7:55 amheldmyw,
If Bush burned the Whitehouse down some of his supporters would say it was a brilliant plan to increase construction jobs in Washigton and weaken the Democrats.
TJIT (f3cc96) — 10/28/2005 @ 8:19 amI agree with 99.9% of your call for an end to recriminations. You don’t have to guess who the other 0.1% is.
Xrlq (e2795d) — 10/28/2005 @ 8:32 amI’m still pissed at Bush. He’s a moron chimperor. What has he ever done. Pushed ahead with the Afghan and Iraq war. That’s it. And the Iraq War, I only give him partial credit (good at pushing stuff through, but wrong on WMD and didn’t get rest of world onboard). Everything else has been pathetic. I almost think we’d be better off with a Democrat who had to react to an obstructionist Republican Congress.
TCO (4dd7d6) — 10/28/2005 @ 8:47 amEven if Miers was out of her depth, was borking her worth the war casualties which will result?http://twominuteoffense.blogspot.com/2005/10/borking-miers-kills-soldiers.html
However one assesses the benefits and the costs, can we all agree that doing a benefit-cost analysis would have been a good idea? Some commentators are so busy partying that they seem to have forgotten to ask what the bill is.
The piper will be paid.
stan (28bfc9) — 10/28/2005 @ 9:22 amPatterico,
Pls, do not conflate pro-hearings with pro-Miers. They were never the same.
That said, she struck me as someone who simply couldn’t take the pressure. All her reported responses, when stripped of spin, seem to indicate a fight-or-flight mindset, and an avoidance of confrontation.
Maybe that’s the reason she largely worked in the background, save for a brief stint on a city council, and even there she seems to have avoided saying anything that would incite angry retaliation.
This is a person who can’t handle anger coming back at her. She prob knew she couldn’t hold up emotionally thru the entire process. The rest you know.
ras (f9de13) — 10/28/2005 @ 9:39 amNote to above: on further thought, she seems especially anxious to avoid face-to-face confrontation, in particular.
Interesting woman, overall, to have accomplished what she did in her career with that approach.
ras (f9de13) — 10/28/2005 @ 9:42 amSure looks to me like it’s Miers supporters who aren’t ready to kiss and make up. Now, I’m sure willing to look forward to the nomination we were promised. Someone like Thomas or Scalia. Conservatives are more that willing to get together and support a good solid nominee. Bring one on, and we’ll all be happy with the results.
But, Conservative opponents of the Miers nomination are still shocked and offended by the underhanded way they’ve been portrayed by GOP bully boys. We might seem calm, but a still surface can be misleading, like the seeming calm of deep waters. Conservatives are not going to sit back, keep quiet, and take a bunch of crap from loud mouth fools for long. A day or two at most. Fair warning has been given.
The GOP establishment, and their barking dogs, would do well to remember elephants have long memories, and that stupid insults from former friends are especially hurtful. Such nonsense is totally unnecessary and ultimately nothing short of a self-destructive display of pique, ignorance and weakness.
Conservatives are not impressed with the shoddy performance of the GOP in this whole Miers mess. Her supporters now have an opportunity to put things right, but haven’t got the brains or personal integrity to put their unseemly anger aside and do what is best for the Grand Old Party or for our country.
Black Jack (ee9fe2) — 10/28/2005 @ 9:45 amRejecting Miers kills soldiers?
W? T? F?
Christopher Cross (ee574f) — 10/28/2005 @ 9:50 amBlack Jack,
Repeatedly insulting and denigrating others while calling for them to kiss and make up with you … hmm. C’mon, you can do better.
ras (f9de13) — 10/28/2005 @ 10:00 amPls, do not conflate pro-hearings with pro-Miers. They were never the same.
For Hugh, at least, they were, as I have explained. All he expected her to do at the hearings was 1) not say how she’d rule and 2) say she is a judicial conservative. He didn’t set the bar low; he set it on the ground.
Patterico (298127) — 10/28/2005 @ 10:11 amRe: #6
Click on the link, read it, and you’ll know exactly what I’m talking about. Chicken Little is alive and well, all puffed up and lashing out at shadows. Fools rush in where wise men fear to tread. And this, my sometimes friends, is perilous ground indeed.
This is exactly the sort of idiot nonsense which not only reveals an astonishing poverty of the intellect, but also shows a perverse inability to separate simple cause from effect.
ras,
I usually agree with you, but not this time. I could mollify my rhetoric, but that wouldn’t make the point: it isn’t Miers Conservative opponents who misbehaved here, but her supporters who are guilty of Lefty tactics. They wrongly blame Conservatives for their own sins.
Now, I do realize I’m quite close to a line which shouldn’t be crossed, and I don’t believe I’ve crossed it. But, that’s Patterico’s call and I’ll respect his decisions, of course. I’m a guest here and I know my place.
Black Jack (ee9fe2) — 10/28/2005 @ 10:27 amBlack Jack,
I actually think it was Miers’ critics who crossed the line many times, and that most of the criticism they got back was a reaction/mirror to their initial tone. Perhaps they felt they were justified given the stakes, but the tone was set and followed.
But – and this is key – so what? It doesn’t matter at all if I’m right or wrong on that pt. That was yesterday and s/b behind us already.
Today, the game is still going on. If anyone’s too injured to play at form, they should step out till they’re better. That advice applies to all, pro-Miers, anti-Miers, pro-hearing and anti-hearing.
ras (f9de13) — 10/28/2005 @ 11:02 amPatterico –
As for recriminations, it depends on what the opponents of Miers said and how they behaved. Krauthammer opposed Miers and I have no quarrel at all with him. Coulter opposed Miers and I won’t be satisfied until she is sent to bed without supper. As for David Frum, his motives are so suspect — from everything he has said — that I think he should withdraw from public pronouncements for a time.
If you said anything that, on second thought, you think went over the line, then you should apologize. (And, of course, supporters of Miers should do the same.)
Jim Miller (a444e4) — 10/28/2005 @ 11:15 amras,
I don’t see critics of the Miers nomination pointing fingers and calling names in the NY Times. I don’t see Conservatives gloating over this sorry spectacle. But I do see bitter anger, recriminations, and sour grapes from Miers supporters who just can’t seem dust themselves off, focus on the future, and move on.
Forgive me, but Stuck on Stupid, isn’t an agenda I can get behind.
Black Jack (ee9fe2) — 10/28/2005 @ 11:17 amBlack Jack,
I don’t see…
Turn around a few times and look in all directions. It’s there.
Regardless, time to move forward.
ras (f9de13) — 10/28/2005 @ 12:19 pm“I don’t see Conservatives gloating over this sorry spectacle.”
Then you haven’t read Ann Coulter or David Frum and you didn’t listen to Tony Snow yesterday. And the gloating was only partly concealed at National Review Online. I suspect a quick search around the blogs would give you many more examples of gloating from opponents of Miers.
Jim Miller (fd444d) — 10/28/2005 @ 12:23 pmLots of blame the victim from anti-Miers people. The critics mug Miers for a month. Then, Miers withdraws and the President’s supporters are the ones who now have to shut up immediately. Sad.
Bob (e4f8f7) — 10/28/2005 @ 12:35 pmThen your eyes aren’t open. For an hour or two, a prime example of such gloating was right here on this blog.
Xrlq (ffb240) — 10/28/2005 @ 1:14 pmI’m not saying there’s been no gloating at all, I say gloating is counterproductive and inappropriate, but rather insignificant compared to an Op/Ed in the NY Times, or to off-the-wall allegations such as those in #6 above.
I say critics of the Miers nomination largely opposed her on the basis of her suitability for the SC: on the merits of the nomination. Her supporters are the ones who rushed to the MSM to charge Conservatives as sexist and elitist snobs. That one’s on you.
Sure, I’m ready to move on, but not with a fusillade of arrows in my back from the folks who started the fight in the first place. You don’t get to spit on Conservative values, call us ugly names, and then say it’s all our fault. Not today, boys, no, not this day.
You say you want reconciliation. Fine, we share the same goal, but please don’t try to stab Conservatives in the back at the same time you cry crocodile tears. It puts the lie to your pleas and precludes the very thing you say is your fond desire.
It takes two to tango, and you guys aren’t holding up your end.
Black Jack (ee9fe2) — 10/28/2005 @ 1:16 pmThen your eyes aren’t open. For an hour or two, a prime example of such gloating was right here on this blog.
Though, in fairness, you should have noted that the gloating did not come from me, but rather from The Angry Clam. If you don’t say that, people who didn’t see the post (or my explanation of why I took it down) are going to be misled.
Patterico (c7959e) — 10/28/2005 @ 1:23 pmI don’t really get the complaints about Coulter. She was rude, yes; unfair, yes; sharp, yes; insulting, yes; funny only if you agreed with her, yes- and this is different from her usual style, how?
I’ve always thought she was really funny but equally rude, and I would never, ever recommend reading her stuff to somebody who both already agrees with her and also likes a heavy dose of sharp and pungent tongue.
George Will is a milder version of the same thing-witty, but compelling only if you already agree.
I am very disappointed in HH taking this to the NYT. I am disappointed, but unimpressed with the veiled threat that from now on everything that goes wrong will be traced back to this discussion and those who opposed Miers will be blamed.
I am unimpressed because if he wishes to take that line we can point out that we have Arlen Specter in large part thanks to HH’s refusal to disagree with the Party Line.
Incidentally, I read Ace and disagree strongly with the comments that said HH’s behavior here is because is more of a Christian than a Republican. He may be, I certainly hope so- but it’s not the explanation for his attributing hateful, unlovely motives to everybody who disagreed with him this time.
Most evangelicals I know were opposed to the Miers nomination. A small number of big names spoke out in favor, but CWA was opposed, plenty of the homeschooling bloggers were opposed, and even Focus and Family’s Dobson was actually revising his opinion and letting it be known that he had been too hasty in his support.
Bottom line- I’d be more than happy to move on, but it’s a little hard to ignore having an ‘alleged conservative’ spitting on everybody who disagrees with him in the very public forum of anti-conservative NYT.
DeputyHeadmistress (e71725) — 10/28/2005 @ 2:18 pmHeadmistress,
May I please have a double dose of sharp and pungent tongue? Ann Coulter’s a personal favorite, she’s smart, thin, sexy, and calls um like she sees um.
Also, she doesn’t suffer fools gracefully. I like that, and she makes my monkey dance.
Black Jack (ee9fe2) — 10/28/2005 @ 2:38 pmBlack Jack,
It takes two to tango, and you guys aren’t holding up your end.
You hold up your end doing the macarena, not the tango. I thought everyone knew that.
ras (f9de13) — 10/28/2005 @ 2:53 pmras,
When you’re as big an ass as I am, it takes two to hold it up.
Black Jack (ee9fe2) — 10/28/2005 @ 2:59 pmThe president is a frigging moron and I’m damn sick of pulling his chestnuts out of the fire and I could care less if the Democrats exploit the divide. I’ve had enough of Bush’s playing chicken with the vehicle of conservative’s desires. I got no problem with being self-destructive, now. Maybe he ought to worry a bit about not getting into tiffs with us versus us worry about making him look bad.
What a frigging moron to nominate Harriet fucking Meiers. That he pulled her does not change how frigging moronic the pick was. Gawd…I still shudder over the thought of those nominalizations in her prose.
TCO (5e2e67) — 10/28/2005 @ 4:52 pmstan, Even if Miers was out of her depth, was borking her worth the war casualties which will result? Come on stan, are you really suggesting with a straight face either that Miers was “borked” or that our criticism of her suitability as a justice actually resulted in the deaths of soldiers? Nothing over the top there.
I wonder, are we just always, you know, supposed to drink the cool aid without questioning? Somehow I thought the republican party was the party with all the ideas and intellectual sort of stuff going on. Was I wrong or just naive?
Harry Arthur (b318a5) — 10/28/2005 @ 6:50 pm