# Bush nominates Harriet Miers for the Supreme Court **URL:** \ **Category:** Miscellaneous and Personal Stuff I Must Share\ **Created:** [October 3, 2005, 12:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-nominates-harriet-miers-for-the-supreme-court/324555 "2005-10-03T12:11:27Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2005, 4:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-nominates-harriet-miers-for-the-supreme-court/324555/41 "2005-10-03T16:03:07Z")
> [@Mr. Moto](#): > > Arguing from willful ignorance? I wouldn’t have figured you’d do this, **Diogenes**? Not willful ignorance. Laziness. ---
**Author:** ![Mollie\_Magill](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mollie_magill/32/20882_2.png) [@Mollie\_Magill](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mollie_Magill)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2005, 4:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-nominates-harriet-miers-for-the-supreme-court/324555/42 "2005-10-03T16:09:17Z")
> [@Mr. Moto](#): > > Indications are that this nomination was consulted upon by Sen. Harry Reid, the minority leader. According to one Senator who was consulted, the process went something like this: Bush: Who would you pick. Senator: I think X, Y, or Z would be good picks. Bush: Yes, they would. Thanks. Apparently, Ms. Miers’ name never came up in at least one conversation. As with Roberts. I’ll reserve judgment until I learn more. One thing that is interesting is that apparently she was a campaign contributor to both Gore (1988 attempt, I guess) and Benson. ---
**Author:** ![UncleBeer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/977dab/32.png) [@UncleBeer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UncleBeer)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2005, 4:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-nominates-harriet-miers-for-the-supreme-court/324555/43 "2005-10-03T16:19:49Z")
> [@Diogenes the Cynic](#): > > This is only MHO, but I would say that lack of judicial experience should be an automatic disqualification for consideration. If I can see an exception, it might be for a law professor or someone who can demonstrate some real depth of constitutional scholarship. > > There is absolutely nothing remarkable about Miers’ credentials other than her relationship to Bush. The country is filled with former presidents of state Bars. It’s also filled with experienced federal judges. I refuse to believe that this woman is the best Bush can find to serve on the highest court. This is just cronyism at its worst. It’s an insult to the court and an insult to all the more qualified candidates who are available. Okay. I rather agree with you. A complete lack of federal bench experience _should_ automatically disqualify a potential candidate. But since that’s never been the practice, I find no compelling reason to deamnd that it be now. Again, tho’, I think you are probably correct that Bush could find a better candidate (with or without federal bench experience) - if he really wanted to. ---
**Author:** ![Plynck](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/3e96dc/32.png) [@Plynck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Plynck)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2005, 4:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-nominates-harriet-miers-for-the-supreme-court/324555/44 "2005-10-03T16:33:21Z")
> [@Baldwin](#): > > Bush seems to like to stick to his inner circle of friends and acquaintances whenever possible; some people think this is one of many signs of his being an untreated drug addict. There seems to be a growing tendency lately to surmise whether Bush has resumed his old habits. I think those claims move the argument to a true/false basis, and that shifts focus away from whether he is able to govern effectively. I believe that he has always been out of his depth, and relies on those around him to cover for him. “You’re not really paranoid from drugs if they really \*are \* out to get you.” I am as liberal as they get, but Roberts was IMHO a brilliant (political) choice for the Supreme Court. I think that the Democrats should have acknowledged it as such and saved their ammunition. I haven’t much respect for Bush or his policies, but this was one that he got right. Miers, on the other hand, is back to business as usual. W is well known for rewarding unquestioning loyalty over competence. Whether she is competent or not remains to be seen, but after hearing that she had no judicial experience it came as no surprise to me that she had already proven her loyalty to Bush. This is the time for the Democrats to get tough. Given the stated intent of receiving a rapid decision on this nomination, Bush could help out by showing up in person with her and saying “Harry, you’re doing a heckuva job.” 😃 ---
**Author:** ![astro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/9dc877/32.png) [@astro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/astro)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2005, 5:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-nominates-harriet-miers-for-the-supreme-court/324555/45 "2005-10-03T17:29:40Z")
In discussing the appointment in the break room with one of my co-workers, who’s a long time regional major domo in Democratic politics and organizing, kept pointing out she was 60 years old SINGLE AND UNMARRIED! So after about the third time I asked him if he was inferring that she was a lesbian. “Oh no!” he replied “I’m just saying she’s SINGLE AND UNMARRIED!” So the Democrats are concerned that he’s appointed a dyke. A pit bull dyke in size 6 shoes. ---
**Author:** ![astro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/9dc877/32.png) [@astro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/astro)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2005, 5:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-nominates-harriet-miers-for-the-supreme-court/324555/46 "2005-10-03T17:52:40Z")
[JUSTICE MIERS?](http://www.americanpolitics.com/20051003Editors.html) > [@](#): > > She once told me that the president was the most brilliant man she had ever met . Hmm… :dubious: ---
**Author:** ![Zebra](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/c0e974/32.png) [@Zebra](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zebra)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2005, 6:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-nominates-harriet-miers-for-the-supreme-court/324555/47 "2005-10-03T18:06:45Z")
> [@Airman Doors](#): > > A non-lawyer? She was the President of the Texas Bar Association. I’d think that she is a pretty good lawyer. And that is what worries me the most. The Texas legal system seems a bit wrong to me. If that is how Texans want to live, fine, but I don’t want Texas Justice to become American Justice. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2005, 6:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-nominates-harriet-miers-for-the-supreme-court/324555/48 "2005-10-03T18:07:50Z")
> [@astro](#): > > In discussing the appointment in the break room with one of my co-workers, who’s a long time regional major domo in Democratic politics and organizing, kept pointing out she was 60 years old SINGLE AND UNMARRIED! So after about the third time I asked him if he was inferring that she was a lesbian. “Oh no!” he replied “I’m just saying she’s SINGLE AND UNMARRIED!” > > So the Democrats are concerned that he’s appointed a dyke. A pit bull dyke in size 6 shoes. Since when is one Democrat “the Democrats?” :dubious: ---
**Author:** ![astro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/9dc877/32.png) [@astro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/astro)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2005, 6:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-nominates-harriet-miers-for-the-supreme-court/324555/49 "2005-10-03T18:21:42Z")
> [@Diogenes the Cynic](#): > > Since when is one Democrat “the Democrats?” :dubious: You mean you aren’t a hive mind? That’s disappointing. That means there’s no Democratic “Brain Bug” to capture. ---
**Author:** ![carnivorousplant](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnivorousplant/32/3563_2.png) [@carnivorousplant](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/carnivorousplant)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2005, 6:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-nominates-harriet-miers-for-the-supreme-court/324555/50 "2005-10-03T18:27:56Z")
> [@astro](#): > > That means there’s no Democratic “Brain Bug” to capture. I ate it with a saucy little chianti. It was rather embarassing, but quite tasty. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Plynck](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/3e96dc/32.png) [@Plynck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Plynck)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2005, 6:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-nominates-harriet-miers-for-the-supreme-court/324555/51 "2005-10-03T18:28:23Z")
> [@astro](#): > > [JUSTICE MIERS?](http://www.americanpolitics.com/20051003Editors.html) > “She once told me that the president was the most brilliant man she had ever met.” She met Clinton? 🙂 [This](http://frum.nationalreview.com/) may be where that quote originated (bolding mine): > [@](#): > > I believe I was the first to float the name of Harriet Miers, White House counsel, as a possible Supreme Court. Today her name is all over the news. **I have to confess that at the time, I was mostly joking.** Harriet Miers is a capable lawyer, a hard worker, and a kind and generous person. She would be an reasonable choice for a generalist attorney, which is indeed how George W. Bush first met her. She would make an excellent trial judge: She is a careful and fair-minded listener. **But US Supreme Court?** I wonder if this really a strategic move; set Miers up as a voluntary sacrificial lamb to draw Democratic fire (and perhaps even a filibuster), withdraw her nomination and renominate with a less controversial (but conservative) jurist. If so, another brilliant play. I smell Rove. ---
**Author:** ![Zebra](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/c0e974/32.png) [@Zebra](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zebra)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2005, 6:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-nominates-harriet-miers-for-the-supreme-court/324555/52 "2005-10-03T18:29:48Z")
> [@astro](#): > > You mean you aren’t a hive mind? That’s disappointing. That means there’s no Democratic “Brain Bug” to capture. No, you have to stamp us out one by one. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2005, 6:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-nominates-harriet-miers-for-the-supreme-court/324555/53 "2005-10-03T18:32:40Z")
> [@astro](#): > > You mean you aren’t a hive mind? That’s disappointing. That means there’s no Democratic “Brain Bug” to capture. I’m not even a Democrat. ---
**Author:** ![Syntropy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/65b543/32.png) [@Syntropy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Syntropy)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2005, 6:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-nominates-harriet-miers-for-the-supreme-court/324555/54 "2005-10-03T18:54:12Z")
> [@This Year's Model](#): > > But there have been plenty of Supreme Court justices who were never judges. Almost everybody must think that either Warren or Rehnquist was good, and neither of them had been a judge. Plenty? The only name I’ve seen thrown out thus far has been Rehnquist. In actuality, there have been three which is a pretty far cry from “plenty.” More to the point, though, is her lack of experience with anything other than corporate law. Roberts at least clerked at the SCOTUS, and has some judicial experience. That and the attitude that since she’s a woman, Democrats should be placated. I don’t care if she’s male, female, Kleinfelter’s or neuter. With her background how can she be expected to make informed rulings? Being head of the Texas Bar Assn does not infer knowledge of constitutional law. ---
**Author:** ![Syntropy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/65b543/32.png) [@Syntropy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Syntropy)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2005, 6:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-nominates-harriet-miers-for-the-supreme-court/324555/55 "2005-10-03T18:58:06Z")
Sorry, only three have been appointed _CJ_. ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Moto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9de0a6/32.png) [@Mr.Moto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Moto)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2005, 7:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-nominates-harriet-miers-for-the-supreme-court/324555/56 "2005-10-03T19:00:43Z")
> [@Maureen](#): > > Sorry, only three have been appointed _CJ_. I was about to say, I named a lot more than three earlier, and my list wasn’t at all comprehensive. ---
**Author:** ![Blalron](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/35a633/32.png) [@Blalron](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Blalron)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2005, 7:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-nominates-harriet-miers-for-the-supreme-court/324555/57 "2005-10-03T19:04:14Z")
> [@astro](#): > > You mean you aren’t a hive mind? That’s disappointing. That means there’s no Democratic “Brain Bug” to capture. I suspect that Karl Rove is the Republican Brain Bug. ---
**Author:** ![ratatoskK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ratatoskk/32/2987_2.png) [@ratatoskK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ratatoskK)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2005, 7:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-nominates-harriet-miers-for-the-supreme-court/324555/58 "2005-10-03T19:04:54Z")
This link from the [NY Times](http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/national/AP-Scotus-Miers-Quote-Box.html?pagewanted=all) has various people’s brief reactions to the nomination, including this one (my favorite): > [@](#): > > ‘‘The president has selected a loyal political ally without a judicial record to sit on the highest court in the land.’’ – Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif. ---
**Author:** ![Syntropy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/65b543/32.png) [@Syntropy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Syntropy)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2005, 7:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-nominates-harriet-miers-for-the-supreme-court/324555/59 "2005-10-03T19:12:13Z")
> [@Blalron](#): > > I suspect that Karl Rove is the Republican Brain Bug. Did you see _Bush’s Brain_? Fascinating stuff, in a train wreck kind of way. I keep waiting for him to grow a handle bar mustache and start twirling it and laughing maniacally. ---
**Author:** ![Airman\_Doors\_USAF](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e36b37/32.png) [@Airman\_Doors\_USAF](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Airman_Doors_USAF)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2005, 7:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-nominates-harriet-miers-for-the-supreme-court/324555/60 "2005-10-03T19:49:41Z")
> [@ratatoskK](#): > > This link from the [NY Times](http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/national/AP-Scotus-Miers-Quote-Box.html?pagewanted=all) has various people’s brief reactions to the nomination, including this one (my favorite): I like John Kerry’s, myself: > [@](#): > > ‘‘America can’t afford a replay of the unrevealing confirmation process that preceded Chief Justice Roberts’ confirmation. … Without a meaningful exchange during the confirmation hearings, there is no way to know how Ms. Miers views the Constitution, whether she’s a strict constructionist in the mold of Justices Scalia and Thomas, or whether she will protect fundamental rights.’’ Is he saying that Scalia and Thomas aren’t protecting fundamental rights? If so, I contend that he is way off base. I like how he said it, though. He might have just asked them if they’ve stopped beating their wives the way that statement was made. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-nominates-harriet-miers-for-the-supreme-court/324555.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-nominates-harriet-miers-for-the-supreme-court/324555.md?page=4)