Mark Steyn: Has Bush blown it?

The Spectator (U.K.) ^ | 10/08/05 | Mark Steyn

[Betaille]

"If someone is a "pushover", and she is confronted by two gangs, one headed by Ginsberg/Stevens and the other headed by Scalia/Thomas, which gang wins?"

Well which way did Souter go? It's not just Ginsberg and Stevens that she's facing, it's the entire hostile DC culture that only the strongest, most intellectual conservatives can prevail in.

[Betaille]

"Being a conservative politically is a very different thing than having a constitutional interprative philosophy."

EXACTLY. The "trust Bush" crowd seems to be under the impression that the Supreme Court is just a place where 9 people cast and tally votes.

[mountainfolk]

Finally, a reasoned opinion by a pundit who is not bashful about saying he does not have all of the answers or know all there is to know about Harriet Miers and her nomination by Pres Bush to the Supreme Court. He is lukewarm towards Miers, admitting he knows little about her. However, he does not base his opinion of the matter on educational elitism or attempt to minimize and marginalize her or her intellect as many of his pundit colleagues have done. FWIW, every major issue that comes up has a constituency which screams from the roof tops that they will never vote Republican again if things don't go their way. All I can say is, it is their loss of this country goes totally communist/socialist.

[frankjr]

I see what you are saying. At this point, I have no reason to believe she is a "pushover". I think we need to see how she handles the hearings. Remember, Miers is a pit bull in size 6 shoes! ;)

[Joe Brower]

I hope you're right, Julie, I really do. Because the legacy that Miers will create will be the posterity that my political activism has given to my young children. I still hold to the fact that there were several other notables who would have been far better choices, albeit likely to incite much more of a fight from the Senators on the far left of the aisle.

In any case, I am going to use this for the front-page op-ed of the upcoming (and currently a few days late!) issue of the PATRIOT newsletter. I'm sure it will piss more than a few people off, which just tells me I'm doing a good job. $:-)

[gumboyaya]

Good one - Bush is genius.

[wardaddy]

Well, we can dream, can’t we?

No, you must Bot, you ingrate.

[finnigan2]

"Bush, it seems ever more obvious, is the Third Wayer Clinton only pretended to be."

- My opinion is that Clinton was never more than a poll driven tactician, content to go for short term political popularity, willing to do or say anything to garner short term approval ratings, regardless of principles(which, as we know, he has none). That is why his Presidency produced so little in the way of lasting achievements.
Bush on the other hand is a long term strategist, willing to take the short term dips in approval to garner the achievement of a longer term goal based on soundly based personal principles.
My belief is that Bush will rebound in personal approval with his base and with voters at large by mid 2006 based on two major events, ie; Meir will have rendered some Supreme Court opinions which will confirm her as a solid constructionist and secondly, there will be a draw down of American troop levels in Iraq. If, on top of that, Condi can point to some progress in frustrating Iran and North Korea's nuclear ambitions or if Syria has a change of government, it would just be icing on the cake. With these events in place Bush should hold or improve the Party's position in the 2006 elections.
He's gambling that the events I've outlined will happen and is willing to ride out the low popularity polls until they do.
If he's right, look for him to resuscitate the Social Security reforms in 2007 to end his Presidency on a high note.

[RichInOC]

David Souter had, between state and federal courts, about twelve years of judicial experience before Poppy appointed him.

As Phil McGraw likes to ask, how's that workin' for ya?

[Ramius]

If there is any strategy of Mr. Rove behind this nominination, it probably isn't to have her shot down in order to substitute JRB or some such 'louder' conservative.

The stragegy play would be to replace O'Connor with someone unobnoxious and quietly more conservative-- in order to draw at least one of the truly liberal justices (perhaps Ginsberg) to think that it is 'safe' for them to retire without waiting another three years to do it, hoping for a more liberal President to then be in office. There have been rumors that Ginsberg has been thinking about retirement.

It is the *next* replacement that has the potential to fundamentally change the balance of the court. Replacing Rehnquist and O'Connor just keeps the status quo, more or less. If Miers is more reliable and not the 'swing' that O'Connor was, then the balance is nudged slightly our way. But the earthquake that topples the balance will be when Ginsberg's or Souter's seat opens up.

It'd be nice if they did it sooner rather than later. If I were Rove, that's how I'd play it.

[JulieRNR21]

Hey, Joe......I care about the future of 'my young children' and like Steyn.....I trust BUSH!

Listening to Jim Gilespie on Tony Snow show as I type and he's convinced me.....that Harriet Miers is the RIGHT choice!

Hope you'll also take a look at what this blogger says....I think he's spot on!

Code word: MOOSEMUSS


Click here: My Sandmen: Applying the Principles of War to Harriet Miers SCOTUS Nomination

http://mysandmen.blogspot.com/2005/10/applying-principles-of-war-to-harriet.html

[JulieRNR21]

OOOPS.....meant to say 'my young grandchildren'....I feel younger than I am......LOL

[chilepepper]

the more comes out about miers, the better she sounds. packs a .45 eh?

another great column from steyn...

[Argh]

Thank you, I'll have to read it later.

[Protagoras]

Has he blown it? Perhaps, but it's far too early to tell, Mr. Steyn.

He might have to wait, but some of us knew he blew it long before he selected people for the SCOTUS.

[COBOL2Java]

Iow, not a conservative.

There are social conservatives, and there are economic conservatives. Bush is the former, but not the latter. If he was both he'd be more of a Libertarian in the mode of Congressman Ron Paul than a Republican.

[Mr. Mojo]

Some - like you, I presume - maintain it's possible to believe in big government and big spending and paternalistic federal intervention and still be labeled a conservative.

I don't.

[Revolting cat!]

He should of nominated that other woman, you know, the one who...

[Rummyfan]

but she’s not a judge, not a constitutional lawyer, not a legal scholar, not someone with any judicial philosophy or someone who’s shown any interest in acquiring one.

It's probably a good thing that she's not a judge. But the rest of her CV seems to be lacking.

Thanks Pokey!

[Rummyfan]

According to an old boyfriend, Judge Nathan Hecht of the Texas Supreme Court, she packs heat — a Smith & Wesson .45 — which I can say with certainty the other lady justice, the far-left Ruth Bader Ginsberg, never has.

That's interesting. I prefer a Sig myself.....