October 05, 2005

Harriet Miers around the Cotillion

This isn't THE Tuesday Cotillion carnival, that one is HERE at The Gray Tie.

I just threw this together yesterday at my site for some more blog reaction, and with a couple exceptions, the women of Cotillion are pretty much on the same page about the Miers nomination. Chillin' like me, if you will. ;-)

The American Princess:

Face the facts. We're assessing this nominee by the "conservative" stick. Not the "Supreme Court nominee" stick. If you're angry at Bush, go punch a bag, not the nominee. We think we are so much better than the left, but in the end, we're exactly the same. Go ahead an oppose Miers because she might happen to not fit your political mold--but make sure that when you write letters to your Senator to oppose her, that you are doing so on the basis of disliking her brand of Constitutional interpretation--not the basis of a single issue.

Let's not kid ourselves--MANY ARE judging her on the basis of her propensity to being an activist judge. Don't confuse "constructionist" or "originalist" with "will definitely strike down Roe v. Wade." It's completely dishonest to try to disguise your intent by changing the definitions, and you know some people are doing exactly that.

The Anchoress had much to say yesterday that I linked to here, and has links to more positive reactions on the Miers nomination today, along with other linky love!

annika gives me a desperately-needed laugh!

i am a little disappointed that Bush did not take my advice. i have a pretty good idea that he or one of his aides reads this blog. My advice was to pick an in-your-face conservative. My personal choice would have been either Mike McConnell or Janice Rogers Brown. i like McConnell because he's a historian, and i like Brown because she's a Californian.

Of course, if i had my way, and i could give the Supreme Court an extreme makeover, things would be way different. i imagine there would be a huge exodus of liberals from this country, and that wouldn't be such a bad thing. Except for Canada and France, that is.

Kathy (Cake Eater Chronicles):

In short, everyone is caterwauling over nothing right now. Just like with John Roberts we know squat about this nominee. But we'll find out more about her when she goes up for confirmation hearings, won't we? Which is how the system is supposed to work. Remember?

Honestly, I can't figure out if the caterwaulers are cheesed that Bush nominated a supposed moderate conservative or if it's because he's not playing the game the way they think he should.

SondraK has a poll! No victims allowed! Also:

I don’t care what anyone says, I’m never going to vote for George Bush for President ever again.

Little Miss Attila:

Is this one of your crazy-like-a-fox moments, or another gross capitulation? Some of us are more than a little curious.

Maxed Out Mama:

As for me, I don't believe for one second that Harriet Myers will ever buy into illogic such as Breyer's, and that is really what I care about. So I suppose for now I am in the "tentative approval" camp, with the codocil that the idea that a woman must be replaced by a woman doesn't satisfy me.

North American Patriot:

The reaction, from the right side of the blogosphere has ranged from lukewarm to violent recoil, and who could blame them? As I've said before, the Republicans have a majority in both houses, and an unprecedented opportunity to re-shape the Supreme Court. Why waste what is likely to be a once-in-a-lifetime set of circumstances, on a nominee who is completely unremarkable? George, honey...What were you thinking?


I personally think William Kristol is being a bit too liberal about the whole deal. Head, man, use your head!! We're conservatives, we don't put all our eggs in the government basket.

I stand behind The Anchoress' exhortation: Be still. And for the love of Pete, just watch and wait, will ya? Conservatives need to just take a deep breath and chill. Politics isn't our highest aim nor our savior, or have we forgotten that?

Charmaine Yoest:

Why was Miers on Reid's short list?

What does "someone like her" mean?

And finally, if Reid is "very happy," should we be?

On to the hearings.

Rightwingsparkle has no worries:

I don't blame Bush at all for these choices. I also just don't buy that she is not a conservative. Does anyone really believe that Bush doesn't know how the candidates he chooses feels about the "hot button" issues??? Of course he knows. And given how he feels about these issues, I don't think for one minute that he would nominate someone who didn't feel as strongly as he does.

Cassandra (Villainous Company):

Since I've already been accused of cheerleading for Harriet Miers (a meritless accusation, by the way, since I've formed no opinion on her nomination and will form none until I know far more about her) I've decided to follow my natural contrarian impulses and attempt to provide some small counterweight to The Howling that greeted yesterday's announcement.

I was no fan of O'Connor, but to all indications, Miers will be to the right of Justice O'Connor and "real conservatives" are still up in arms over a Justice who will most likely be to the right of a Justice who voted with Scalia and Thomas 80% of the time.

"The Other Beth" at Yeah, Right, Whatever:

Here's some (hopefully) good news (if it's not just a bunch of sugary sweet words):

"There's every indication that she's very similar to Judge Roberts — judicial restraint, limited role of the court, basically a judicial conservative," said Republican consultant Greg Mueller, who works for several conservative advocacy leaders.

Like I said... hopefully that's the truth.

I knew I'd find voices of reason among my friends, even among those who aren't pleased with the Miers nomination. Thanks, y'all, for lifting the foul mood of yesterday. :-D

Posted by Beth at October 5, 2005 12:00 AM