Posted on 10/20/2005 8:48:45 AM PDT by governsleastgovernsbest
In the course of a just-completed press conference with PA Pres. Mahmoud Abbas, Pres. Bush fielded a Miers question.
In defending her record, W asserted, as he has done often, that Miers has been "consistently ranked as one of the country's top lawyers."
That is simply inaccurate.
The National Law Journal has twice ranked her among the country's 100 "most influential" lawyers, and once among the 50 "most influential."
She has never been ranked among the "top" or "most outstanding" lawyers.
I hope people would agree that when it comes to being a good Supreme Court justice, being "inflential" doesn't count for much. Being ouststanding or brilliant would.
I don't think W helps himself or Miers by continuing to make this inaccurate assertion.
Nope, a vote is a vote whether it comes from someone who is brilliant or someone who is a jackass.
The power to persuade colleagues and inspire clerks and others is important.
Finally, a defense of Miers that passes the smell test! "A vote is a vote, so let's have a jackass!"
I could get picky and note that the highest ranking is the honor of being named to SOCTUS! by the President of the USA!
So, Bush is right when his viewpoint is considered.
NWTF (not withstanding the fact) that he would seem to sound more like Clinton, but I guess 2 terms in office wears on one....
Embellishing Miers' record actually hurts her chances, as it suggests the WH isn't confident about who she really is and feels the need to dres things up.
Don't underestimate the value of someone who can deliver a cup of coffee to the other justices, still piping hot!
LOL
bump
Quite a few people do see the Court as a sort of super-legislature.
Maybe she thinks Equal rights means the right to use the blue sweetener packet instead of the pink one?
I'm not a fan of the nomination, but to be fair to the President, he could easily be speaking of his own opinion. You are using the NLJ for a source - the President could be using some other source.
No not a defense of Miers at all...just an observation. See you at the polls.
"Let's see, Justice Breyer, according to the list I made and triple-checked late last night, you prefer a medium-sized dollop of half-and-half, and two Sweet 'n Lows, never Nutrasweet."
"Fine, fine, leave it right there."
But wouldn't that be circular reasoning? If a president picked someone who graduated in the bottom on the class from a mediocre law school, would that ipso facto make the candidate any smarter or more capable?
Yeah, let's get Michael Jackson's lawyer. He's obviously a good one. Nice hairdo too.
Bet Breyer can't wait to turn the apron and serving tray over to the new junior Justice.
In addition, methinks that she was placed on that list b/c she was Bush's counsel.
Here is a question: If GW had said in 00 or even in 04 that he intended to nominate Miers to a SC position, if possible, would he still have been elected?
Many who voted for him did so primarily for the impending SC openings. Many feared who a President Gore or President Kerry might nominate.
Sorry, but I don't think that's a plausible possibility. He has specifically used the word "ranked," which inescapably suggests some third-party evaluation.
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.