?

Log in

At least it's not Gonzales - The Fucking Bluebird of Goddamn Happiness [entries|archive|friends|userinfo]
Zoethe

[ userinfo | livejournal userinfo ]
[ archive | journal archive ]

At least it's not Gonzales [Oct. 3rd, 2005|07:14 am]
Zoethe
[Current Mood |nervousnervous]

Bush has nominated 60-year-old Harriet Miers to replace Sandra Day O'Connor. She is White House counsel and a Bush insider and has never served as a judge, so has no judicial record. I predict a senatorial hearing process as cordial as the one for Roberts and a quick confirmation - I mean, what are they gonna ask her about, really? She's clearly conservative, being a White House insider like she is. But I don't have enough information to know how she'd vote on any of the swing issues.
LinkReply

Comments:
[User Picture]From: crwilley
2005-10-03 11:57 am (UTC)
They want me to accept someone who's never been a judge before as a Supreme Court Justice? Umm. I don't think so? (Or is it more common than I might think?)
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: zoethe
2005-10-03 12:27 pm (UTC)
Not unheard of, but I don't have time to do the research. You don't have to have a judicial record to be a Supreme.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
(Deleted comment)
[User Picture]From: zoethe
2005-10-03 08:38 pm (UTC)
At first blush, but it is traditional. The Supremes deal solely with Constitutional issues, so a regular judicial practice is arguably not that important. She has experience as a litigator, which is good - it's not all corporate counsel background.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: dreagoddess
2005-10-04 12:12 am (UTC)
Approximately 39, IIRC. About a third of all the justices, including Rehnquist.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: zoethe
2005-10-04 02:11 am (UTC)
And Warren
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: shawnj
2005-10-03 12:58 pm (UTC)
Earl Warren wasn't, I believe. It's not really all that uncommon or catastrophic. As long as the person has a logical mind, it really shouldn't be much of an issue.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: theferrett
2005-10-03 02:18 pm (UTC)
It's very common in American history. I wouldn't worry about it.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
(Deleted comment)
From: ex_rita
2005-10-03 12:20 pm (UTC)
She doesn't hate them, but she doesn't see anything wrong with profiling them at the airport.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: zoethe
2005-10-03 12:28 pm (UTC)
That is evil. You crack me up.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: zoethe
2005-10-03 12:27 pm (UTC)
Me-OWWW!!!
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: ls56
2005-10-03 12:23 pm (UTC)
*sigh*
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: jagette227
2005-10-03 12:30 pm (UTC)
I just have a hard time believing that someone that has never been a lawyer or a judge can make compentent decisions in the highest court in the land.

Or are they saving her for the Anna Nicole Smith Trial?
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: zoethe
2005-10-03 01:18 pm (UTC)
She IS a lawyer. She is White House Counsel and has had a lengthy law career. Just never a judge.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: jagette227
2005-10-03 04:04 pm (UTC)
I missed that part. I just have a bad feeling about this in the pit of my stomach.

And I'm a registered republican!
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: leila82
2005-10-03 12:52 pm (UTC)
I saw that this morning, and I'm dying to know more about her and there's NOTHING! I mean, considering the administration, it seems futile to hope for much, but Sandra Day O'Connor ended up being the swing vote, and I'd like to see that again.
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: leila82
2005-10-03 12:53 pm (UTC)
Oh, and on the thought of Gonzales - he spoke at my commencement a couple of years ago, before he was made Attorney Gen. I think quite a few people in the (South Texas) audience were Not Impressed.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: zoethe
2005-10-03 01:19 pm (UTC)
We can but hope.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: miripanda
2005-10-03 12:55 pm (UTC)
How is it possible to nominate someone who's never been a judge, ever???
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: zoethe
2005-10-03 01:20 pm (UTC)
No requirement to judge before playing in the Show. Like many of our diplomats who have no experience before being given cushy posts....
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: simianlovedoc
2005-10-03 12:57 pm (UTC)
My thinking on it was that because she has no judicial record the confirmation process should be more rigorous. I also find it interesting that the first I heard about this 7 A.M. press conference was on NPR as it woke me this morning. There wasn't a peep about it yesterday, that I heard. Talk about stealth nominee. The only way to make it more stealthy would have been to have her land a B2 at National and drive over in an unmarked car.
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: zoethe
2005-10-03 01:20 pm (UTC)
Should be, certainly. Will be? I'm thinking no.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: lyssabard
2005-10-03 01:58 pm (UTC)
I was hoping to hear some of your thoughts on the matter when Roberts was being interrogated, heh, as I really have no law background.

Just a glance at the post today--I think she will be grilled and will try to keep the same silent cards as Roberts, but will have more conservative leanings. Still, like some others, when in power, things may change. No real way to know.

This just makes me twitchy though...Bush's personal lawyer...*twitch*

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: zoethe
2005-10-03 02:01 pm (UTC)
I really had nothing to offer. He was well-rehearsed and made all the right noises, and frankly appeared to be about the best we could hope for from this administration.

Me, I'm at climb under a rock phase, so not a lot of insight into politics these days....
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
From: (Anonymous)
2005-10-03 01:10 pm (UTC)
I think you will see a more involved process in her confirmation. In the past I think a non-judical person was ok being elevated to the Supreme Court, but in this day and age, myself, I feel that we need to have a seasoned jurist on the Court.

I also think this is shrewed move on President Bush's part, because as has been mentioned above, she has no prior record to question her on, but also I think that he is taking a risk alienting his constiuentcy that follows the Court. Granted she is probably soundly conservative, but this term, you are going to see some very contentious issues, such as the Oregon assisted death constitutionality brought before the Court.

(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: unixwiz
2005-10-03 01:10 pm (UTC)
I think you will see a more involved process in her confirmation. In the past I think a non-judical person was ok being elevated to the Supreme Court, but in this day and age, myself, I feel that we need to have a seasoned jurist on the Court.

I also think this is shrewed move on President Bush's part, because as has been mentioned above, she has no prior record to question her on, but also I think that he is taking a risk alienting his constiuentcy that follows the Court. Granted she is probably soundly conservative, but this term, you are going to see some very contentious issues, such as the Oregon assisted death constitutionality brought before the Court.

(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: suzieboz
2005-10-03 02:31 pm (UTC)
How much do you want to bet that the main reason he nominated her was because she is a woman and that will take some "pressure" off of him (and as usual divert attention from the usual crime and games going on in DC....)
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: zoethe
2005-10-03 02:50 pm (UTC)
I'm certain that it was a consideration.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: richtermom
2005-10-03 03:40 pm (UTC)
I think some of the "pressure" was from Laura...
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: suzieboz
2005-10-03 03:41 pm (UTC)
Probably.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: zoethe
2005-10-03 03:43 pm (UTC)
And Momsie.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: suzieboz
2005-10-03 03:44 pm (UTC)
Exactly. Do you know if she had any prior relationships with Bush 1's White House, etc?
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: zoethe
2005-10-03 03:46 pm (UTC)
Not that I've seen, but it's clear that reporters are scrambling for info. If it's there, we'll see it in a day or two.

I think the pressure from Barbara would be for a woman in general, rather than for this woman in particular.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: suzieboz
2005-10-03 03:47 pm (UTC)
Here's a novel idea - how about the best PERSON for the job, regardless of race, color, sex....campaign funds, criminal records, indictments...
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: dreagoddess
2005-10-04 12:16 am (UTC)
No, she didn't. She was Bush's personal lawyer from the days of running for governor. She used to be head of the Texas Lottery Commission, and was the first female president of both the Dallas and Texas Bar Associations. And she was in private practice from the early 70s until the 90s. That's about it. I share your reservations. :\ She's a very talented lawyer, but doesn't appear to have any consitutional or appellate expertise.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: nikkif
2005-10-03 03:25 pm (UTC)
The article I read said that more than one Democratic Senator suggested her to Bush, and that the strongest opposition to her so far is from ultra-conservatives, who are worried that she is a Methodist, because they apparently are "pro-abortion." (Who knew?)
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: zoethe
2005-10-03 03:32 pm (UTC)
Well, that is heartening.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: richtermom
2005-10-03 03:41 pm (UTC)
In Bush's intro he mentioned how she spearheaded and reformed programs for pro-bono work and better legal assistance for low and no-income Texans. Sounds pretty Methodist.

Then again, Bush is theoretically a Methodist, so everything's up for grabs.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: suzieboz
2005-10-03 03:43 pm (UTC)

This line from an article is what scared me though...

"When he first decided to run for governor in the early 1990s, he hired Miers to comb his background for anything derogatory that opponents might try to use to defeat him".

Seems that they have been in "bed together" for a very long time...
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: zoethe
2005-10-03 03:45 pm (UTC)

Re: This line from an article is what scared me though...

Not surprising from Bush. He is the picture of croni-ism.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: suzieboz
2005-10-03 03:46 pm (UTC)

Re: This line from an article is what scared me though...

He's the picture of a LOT of things but I am not going to open up a can of worms but a lot of them are include the "words you can't say on television".....
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: nikkif
2005-10-03 04:41 pm (UTC)

Re: This line from an article is what scared me though...

I agree. That bothers me, too. But I would expect nothing less from him, and apparently its not uncommon for presidents to choose people who have worked for them.

All I'm saying is that if the part I wrote about is true, that opposition is likely to come from the far right, then it certainly could be worse.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: suzieboz
2005-10-03 04:45 pm (UTC)

Re: This line from an article is what scared me though...

However his being so involved with the religious right is what is scaring the crap out of me. Since we don't know that much about this woman and if she's already a "pal" of Bush 1 and 2, it could already be much worse than we realized....
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: dramatic_flower
2005-10-04 03:55 am (UTC)
All I can think of is hearing my moderate and apathetic friends saying, "What's the worst Bush can do...he only has four years."

My answer is and always has been: Plenty.
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: zoethe
2005-10-04 09:38 am (UTC)
His teeth have been pulled to a certain extent by the hurricane incompetence, and he didn't try to shove someone openly fundamentalist down our throats. But he's doing plenty of damage on many fronts, not the least of which is the environment, where he is dismantling much conservation legislation.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)