And the adjustments can start right here:
Posted on 10/27/2005 3:39:07 PM PDT by smoothsailing
October 27, 2005, 5:07 p.m.
Starting Over
After Miers.
Within hours of the withdrawal of the Harriet Miers nomination, commentators were labeling President Bush a "lame duck." They have their analysis exactly backward. Continuing a debilitating fight with his own political base over a weak Supreme Court nominee would have hastened the day that Bush lost his political juice entirely. Withdrawing Miers is the first step toward recovery.
It shows that the White House has not lost all of its political judgment, that it has no mad design to try to govern without its most loyal supporters, and that it is still — despite all the pressure it's facing and some of the inevitable sclerosis that sets in after five years in power — supple enough to readjust after a mistake. Indeed, one of the first rules of politics is not to persist in an error for persistence's sake.
And the Miers nomination was a mistake. Some of her supporters claim that she was "borked," the famous verb created after Ronald Reagan nominee Robert Bork was taken down in a hail of misrepresentations. But it was difficult to misrepresent Miers's positions, because she had so few of them, and, as we learned in recent weeks, they often were contradictory or incoherent (against "the right to choose," and for women's "self-determination"; against the Federalist Society, and for it). No one disputed, as Miers's supporters argued, that she is kind to pets and small children and goes to church every Sunday. It's just that those are qualifications for a neighbor, not a Supreme Court justice.
Backers of Miers didn't give Bush enough credit. They argued that he would never withdraw Miers, because once he is set on a given course, he never changes direction. In this, they adopted a version of the Left's view of Bush — an unthinking political brute, lumbering on with no regard to truth or consequence. In fact, Bush adjusts. He endorsed the Homeland Security Department after opposing it, and removed Michael Brown from the head of the Federal Emergency Management Agency after praising him. Bush persists when he thinks it's right and important — say, in fighting in Iraq or in preserving his tax cuts. The Miers nomination was neither.
That's not to say that the White House didn't need nudging. When most Republican senators were either supinely supporting the nomination or snippily dismissing Miers's critics ("what business do these mere mortals have trying to affect Senate business?") or wringing their hands and resorting to mealy mouthed evasion over a nomination they privately thought was a disaster, Kansas Republican Sam Brownback was more vocal about his doubts than anyone else. If it wasn't quite a profile in courage, it was a profile in more bravery than his Senate colleagues could muster.
During the Miers imbroglio, there was much talk of a conservative crackup. But the nomination created no deep, lasting splits on the Right, despite some harsh words in the blogosphere between Miers's critics and supporters who had the attitude "My president, right or wrong." Many of the arguments used to try to bolster her nomination — practically anyone can be a Supreme Court justice; valuing top-flight credentials is "elitist" — will be quickly retired, which will be a relief since they never should have been advanced in the first place.
The Miers nomination will be forgotten as quickly as the Kerik nomination (remember it?), especially if Bush now picks a supremely qualified judicial conservative. In considering his options, Bush should roam free of the constraints of gender politics — it's quality that matters most. But a solid pick will heal only one of Bush's wounds. The gravest political threat to his presidency is that he has no popular, high-profile initiatives. The Iraq war, if necessary and right, is unpopular. His Social Security initiative is dead. His guest-worker proposal might, unlike Miers, truly fracture the Right. The initial proposal floated out of his tax-reform commission, limiting the mortgage-interest-rate deduction, is a non-starter.
After Miers, there is adjusting still left to do.
— Rich Lowry is author of Legacy: Paying the Price for the Clinton Years.
(c) 2005 King Features Syndicate
http://www.nationalreview.com/lowry/lowry200510271707.asp
It is worth noting that Bush's butchering of this pick will cost us 3 separate votes this fall on abortion related rulings. Fire Andy Card..NOW!
And the adjustments can start right here:
YES YES YES
"Fifty Ways to Lose Your Freedom (Janice Rogers Brown Speech to Institute for Justice)"
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1510443/posts
Janice Rogers Brown The choise of this male conservative.
Ditto!
Sorry folks, but the Souter nom will be the last one conservatives give blind faith for. From now on, it has to be someone of impectable creditials with a track record to prove it. Don't blame us for the Miers snafu...blame Bush and his advisers.
I gladly voted for Bush twice, and do not regret having done so. That said, with his gross mismanagement since the second term started, if he were able to run again, I would vote against him in the primary...but as a Christian to others of the faith, always vote for the GOP in the general, regardless of who it is. Outside of normal circumstances, the Republican candidate will always be the more conservative, and more sympathetic to our views. Voting for the Dems is voting for the enemy; when you stand before the Man, if you're guilty of anything, don't let voting for Dems be in that number...
Absolutely, my tagline had been captured by her already.
National Review will never be able to repair the rift it helped create in the Republican Party. I disagree with Rush Limbaugh. Miers withdrawl will give Democrats an advantage in 2006 and will not unite conservatives enough to stem the attacks from the left.
Janice Rogers-Brown!!! it's first and goal from the one inch line (AGAIN)
My thoughts on the Harriet Miers withdrawal...
---
"Harriet Miers nomination called back for unsportsman like conduct towards the conservatives who elected you President Bush."
"Replay first down..."
"Janice Rogers-Brown!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! sweep right on two...."
Not only is she well-qualified, but she will win her own public relations battle through her own words... without any assistance necessary from ANYONE!
This also brings the radical hate groups like michael moore & moveon.org, etc., and blame American first senators like john kerry, joe biden, barabara boxer, hillary clinton and company into play. All these groups, their supporters and leftist senators can't hold a candle to Janice Rogers-Brown. She can take them on with 'half her
brain tied behind her back". The wacko left in the democRATic party can't touch her and will look like the wacko left fools they are trying to attack her.
DO NOT wimp out again President Bush! Your interception was called back because of a penalty... it's now first and goal AGAIN from the one inch line.
Take the enthusiasm of every college football stadium in the country on any given Saturday in autumn... that comes close to matching the emotion of support that President Bush will enjoy for selecting a nominee to SCOTUS who is a strict constructionist and will NOT make up laws based on their own personal beliefs. Janice Rogers-Brown is
the poster woman for this philosophy.
Janice Rogers-Brown!!! Touchdown for the conservatives who elected you into office!
Which would be just fine with me.
Sadly, I fear Bush is more likely to nominate the guy who cuts his hair.
I agree.
Personally, it will be funny to see their implosion if Gonzales is the nominee as the fault will be squarely on their shoulders.
I like it though, let's have the damn fight. The one thing President Bush needs right now is a fired up base.
(Janice Brown- "Put me in, Coach,I'm ready to play!)
Most Americans have a very short attention span for these type of things (as do I) and are too often mistake the immediate "crisis" of the day for actions that have staying power. If Bush nominates a Brown or Luttig, Miers will soon be forgotten. There is no fracture within the party, or at least no fracture that wasn't there pre-Miers. Conservatives will still vote conservative...for to vote third party is to simply give more power to the left. Limbaugh is right when he says that conservatives disagree on all sorts of stuff, but they still back conservatism. No harm no foul on this one.
"It will be funny to see how the "true conservatives"
....................................
well I guess you have labeled yourself as NOT a true conservative..nuf said you are now ignored.
Karl Rove? He woudn't dare!
"No one disputed, as Miers's supporters argued, that she is kind to pets and small children and goes to church every Sunday."
Statements like this are patronizing, snotty and unnecessary. How can they wonder why people called them "elitist?"
I posted the same thing on an earlier thread. I WOULD love to see them bork him and then send up one a little more liberal and so on. Then the American public will have its say.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.