Stop This Woman!
By Keith Boykin, in politics
Monday, October 3 2005, 11:46AM
President Bush today nominated his longtime ally and White House counsel Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court to replace Justice Sandra Day O’Connor. She should not be confirmed.
The selection of Miers, a former Texas lottery official who has never been a judge, reflects everything that is wrong with the Bush Administration: incompetence, cronyism and the placement of loyalty above all other virtues. Miers has no judicial experience and has never served a day on the People's Court, much less a federal court. The choice of such an obviously unqualified candidate to serve on the nation's highest court is a transparent ploy to select someone with no judicial record but with close and undisclosed ties to the president's agenda. It's an effort to undermine the Senate's role of "advise and consent" by picking someone with no paper trail. It is an outrage.
But don't just take my word for it. Even conservatives think she's unqualified. "The reaction of many conservatives today will be that the president has made possibly the most unqualified choice since Abe Fortas, who had been the president's lawyer," said conservative strategist Manuel Miranda. "The nomination of a nominee with no judicial record is a significant failure for the advisers that the White House gathered around it."
Abe Fortas? What about Clarence Thomas? There was another Supreme Court appointment with little judicial experience. And he embarrassed himself and all of black America when he didn't ask a single question during the 2000 Bush v. Gore case. He later explained that he was too shy to speak up. What the hell?
At a time when the Supreme Court has just suffered two vacancies and the Chief Justice spot is already filled with a newcomer, why pick a second justice with no qualifications? In fact, if Harriet Miers is confirmed to the Supreme Court, I want to be nominated next. Hell, why not nominate Daisy Duck, Donald Duck's girlfriend? She's a woman, which is apparently what Bush was looking for.
On the same day when the Supreme Court begins its new term, the President has embarrassed the court and his own legacy by selecting Miers to fill O'Connor's role. It's the same stunt that Bush's father used when he picked Thomas to replace the legendary Thurgood Marshall. And it says a lot about how the Bush family sees diversity and affirmative action. Papa Bush tried to claim that he chose Clarence Thomas because he was the most qualified person for the job, a claim that not even Clarence Thomas could have believed. "The fact that he is black and a minority has nothing to do with this sense that he is the best qualified at this time," Papa said. "I kept my word to the American people and to the Senate by picking the best man for the job on the merits."
And now Junior Bush has shown his disrespect for the qualified women jurists out there by selecting someone with no experience. Such is the "soft bigotry of low expectations."
Last month, Judge Constance Baker Motley died at 84. She was the first African American woman appointed to the federal judiciary and the only woman on the NAACP legal team that won the landmark school desegregation case in Brown v. Board of Education. At the time of her death, she was senior judge for the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. Motley must be turning over in her grave today knowing that she was never elevated to the High Court but all she had to do was become a presidential crony to be appointed.
Comments conceal
Regan DuCasse
October 3 2005, 12:15PM
Bush loves a simpering, devoted woman in his thrall. The unmarried, child free female enuchs in his world do not impress me.
He thinks we're stupid.
Just place a woman or black in our faces and call his cabinet and court 'diverse', as long as their ideologies reflect his own-they are his guy.
He's already shown that he's unconcerned about the security, culture sharing and economic sanctity of ordinary folks.
He's willing to ignore the Constitution, as long as the white male power structure benefits the most.
He supports his friends, however incompetent and unqualified...at the expense of LIVES.
People are DYING!!!
And meanwhile his self important grinning, and his friend's self satisfied expressions make me want to holla!
savvy101
October 3 2005, 12:17PM
President Bush will be quick to point out that 35 Supreme Court nominees, including several sitting justices did not have prior judicial experience.
But that's what makes my spidey senses tingle. No experience means she has no record. Its hard to object to someone who hasn't decided anything and doesn't have an opinion on record to object to. She's a shot in the dark.
And given this president's propensity for error. We might be in a mell of a hess.
Michael Mut
October 3 2005, 12:48PM
This is preposterous, but not entirely surprising. Same as with the appointment of the idiot referred to as "Brownie" by our leader W to head FEMA ...
This could have an even more devastating effect on law making an interpretation for years to come; much worse than a Category 5 hurricance.
God I miss Bill "Bubba" Clinton!
~M~
Kevin C
October 3 2005, 12:49PM
For a President to be so damn anti-gay,he don't mind screwing us Americans up the azz.
Bernie
October 3 2005, 1:09PM
What this is is a clever ploy by the Karl Rove-led White House. Here's the intended scenario.
A. Submit an obviously unqualified candidate for the Court and subject her to the full drawn out process of review and ultimate defeat in the Senate confirmation hearing.
B. Decry the politicization of the proceedings and beg the Senate to make this a much less contentious affair.
C. Make the general public tire of the whole thing.
D. Then submit the person they really want for the Court, who will be a real conservative ideologue. By then everyone will be so fed up with the drawn out nature of the whole thing, the candidate will pass without much opposition.
There is method in their supposed madness.
cmoney
October 3 2005, 2:06PM
I don't trust any nominee from this president. Her non-judicial background doesn't bother me. It would be hard for someone to be as ridiculous as a Judge Bork, who was a judge. Her association with Bush is what is most troubling. She donated money to Gore and to the Clinton campaigns when whe was a democrat (!) However, she is from a large Texas lawfirm that represented many corrupt corporations and "W" personally. That is what is troubling to me. I fail to see her commitment to the poor, civil rights or minorities. That remains to be seen. Without knowing much about her other than she is unmarried and has no children (Lesbian?!), I can only assume the worse coming from this administration.
cmoney
October 3 2005, 2:07PM
Also, somebody tell her the Tammy Faye look went out years ago!!
Nyah Molneaux
October 3 2005, 2:19PM
Well if there is some good news to this, if she is picked as a judge she wont be there for long. Bitch look like she is going to croak at any minute.
Ron
October 3 2005, 4:04PM
And why exactly is she unqualified? There have been other justices and nominees who have had no judicial experience. Miers DOES have an extensive legal background however. I'm gonna have to wait til the confirmation hearings to determine if she's unqualified or not. Right now I'm not seeing anything to create all this fervor that she's so unqualified.
Laura
October 3 2005, 5:27PM
He just wants people in there who will pardon the corruption of warmongering, murderous conservative regiemes. That is the reason for appointing yes-persons like Miers, Roberts, Gonzales, Negroponte, Condi, etc., etc. The current crop of corporate babykillers will all get off just as Bush 1 pardoned all those Iran Contra murderers as these people rise through the ranks.
Andrew Caldwell
October 3 2005, 5:33PM
Clearly this is a stealth candidate, picked for her lack of a paper trail, as much as for the fact that she marches in lock-step with the Bush Administration, a group of people incapable of accepting criticism or dissent, be it from without or within. Her lack of experience means a lack of a record--except for the fact that as President of the Texas Bar Association, she attempted to reverse its pro-choice position, albeit unsuccessfully. That alone should raise alarm bells about her concept of the right to privacy, which is the basis for both abortion rights and gay rights, among so many others.
We must mobilize against this candidate and get the questions flying. We must gather momentum, call our representatives, demand answers to questions, and demand a Supreme Court Justice who is qualified, independent, and worthy of a lifelong appointment to this powerful post.
We cannot stay quiet.
Andre'
October 3 2005, 7:18PM
I know of a sure fire way to stop this woman!!!!
Win some elections and then you can pick the judges you want!!
Give me a break!!
We had 8 years of Clinton and got nothing in return not even a real cabinet appointment.
Lets stop throwing our votes to 1 party and start forcing them to give us our piece of the pie or we will stay home on election day!!!
Ben
October 3 2005, 7:24PM
She sets off my gaydar.
And I'm with Bernie's comments: this is a red herring to wear out America. They learned their lesson of Bork. Now: introduce someone unqualified, go through the hoops, fail on purpose, tire America and the Senate, serve up some further distractions - Iran anyone? - and then nominate the real choice who walks through in an exhausted, time-of-crisis check/balance fog.
Sound too conspiratorial? Too clever?
They're not stupid so much as they're arrogant. Important distinction....
Kenneth
October 3 2005, 9:36PM
Keith, now she did a little more than control lottery. Although she's underqualifed, with Bush, hell, we could have gotten much worse.
"Prior to joining the White House staff, Ms. Miers was Co-Managing Partner at Locke Liddell & Sapp, LLP, where she helped manage an over 400-lawyer firm. Previously, she was President of Locke, Purnell, Rain & Harrell, where she worked for 26 years. In 1992, Ms. Miers became the first woman elected Texas State Bar President following her selection in 1985 as the first woman to become President of the Dallas Bar Association. She also served as a Member-At-Large on the Dallas City Council. Ms. Miers received her bachelor's degree and J.D. from Southern Methodist University. "
Kenneth Winfrey
October 3 2005, 9:59PM
Unqualified and/or like-minded friends of a controlling administration for government jobs is nothing new. What frightens me is that she looks more like she got caught on the wrong side of the glass dome from "Total Recall."
Neverthteless, if charges are brought against the members of this administration, most of them won't make it to the Supreme Court. There will be nothing to debate. Their crimes aren't hardly worthy of high court's time.
Miers apparently hasn't been an outspoken advocate for or against any particular issue and, her personal background is enigmatic thus far. One blogger writes (from http://www.politicalmess.com/index.php/category/supreme-court/): "The very first thing I thought is that the Christian religious extremists might have a problem with Miers. She’s 60, never been married, no children? That should probably send up a red light with them. Whether it’s just that she’s extremely devoted to her career or if she bats for the other team, you know they don’t truck with women who aren’t committed to the penis and offspring and presenting the pot roast while wearing pearls."
Bush keeps picking these flies from the wall who haven't done or said much to define how they'll act on certain issues. He's not going to appoint any liberals. For some reason, the Universe has seen fit to give this man the opportunity to significantly influence the highest court of this nation. Go figure... I guess we'll see what these people are made of when this session is more fully underway.
cmoney
October 3 2005, 11:32PM
"What frightens me is that she looks more like she got caught on the wrong side of the glass dome from "Total Recall." " ---LMAO!!! LOL! :-)
Laura
October 4 2005, 12:58AM
""The very first thing I thought is that the Christian religious extremists might have a problem with Miers. She’s 60, never been married, no children? That should probably send up a red light with them. Whether it’s just that she’s extremely devoted to her career or if she bats for the other team, you know they don’t truck with women who aren’t committed to the penis and offspring and presenting the pot roast while wearing pearls.""
Sure they do, at least the Bush Admin does -- they could give a rip about Christian Conservatives except for votebanking purposes. Whoever wrote that forgot about how quickly they rush to the defense of our First Black Bachelorette Condi, as well as Ken Mehlman, Chairman of the RNC, and that goosestepping magpie, Jeff Gannon.
So shall they be so quick to claim the libruls don't like Miers becuzz she's 'a women', and insinuate elitist leftist homophobia or some such nonsense. They have pulled the same old gag since Clarence Thomas and they will continue to do the same thing with their ever-expanding dog and pony show of the Handpicked Coloreds and white women. And unfortunately, the left will continue to fall for it, if their track record is any indicator.
Just so long as the above bat for corporate-personhood and refined fascism, and allow themselves to be used as sticks to beat regular nonmarried/no kids/nontraditionals, that's all that really matters.
Laura
October 4 2005, 1:02AM
"They're not stupid so much as they're arrogant. Important distinction...."
well...they're stupid AND arrogant.
A lethal combination for the normal people of the world.
avi
October 4 2005, 4:55AM
what's up with the whole "pitbull in size 6 shoes" comment by bush? does that mean he's going to keep her tied up out back of his mansion until she's so agitated and hungry she attacks whatever he throws in front of her? and will someone please comment on her scary eyeliner? how does someone wear under eye eyeliner and no makeup on their eyebrows. plus her bangs are crooked. if she doesn't respect her own body, roe v. wade is truly history. break out the pennyroyal tea.
Bernard Bradshaw
October 4 2005, 10:00AM
I can't believe that I am actually going to defend Bush, but I think many of you are WAY off base calling Miers unqualified. So what this woman has no judicial experience. There is nothing in the U.S. Constitution that say that you even have to be a lawyer to sit on the US Supreme Court--let alone a judge.
I actually admire that he picked someone who didn't graduate from Harvard of Yale Law School, and who COULD bring a diverse viewpoint to the court. And by the way, if I am not mistaken, Rehnquist (the former Chief Justice) was never a judge either.
Now don't get me wrong. I wish someone else would have been appointed. I do think that the Miers appointment is a blatant exercise in cronyism. But if you think that most of the judges got on the supreme court because of pure merit, then you are living in a fantasy world.
I would like to see you all bitching and complaining had GWB appointed a real conservative judge from one of the appellate circuits.
Who knows, Miers could be Dubya's David Souter. Which is why, as Keith says, conservatives think she's unqualified. Its not because she has never been a judge--it's because they aren't positive she is a strict conservative. Now I think it's funny that Keith is interested in what conservative have to say when they support his views. Miers might be the next David Souter (a liberal in conservative cloting), Who knows? Its a big hope, but I will reserve judgment until I learn a little bit more about her.
Stop being so quick to judge.
Bernard Bradshaw
alicia banks
October 4 2005, 5:09PM
great analysis keith
as always
bush is a twisted moron who lives in a tiny fantasy world...indeed in his world she is the ideal nominee
but all of his ideas are uniquely psychotic
what an insult to her future peers!!!
even the nonexistent qualiifications of uncle thomas grossly pale by comparison
is gwb not the most brazen retard in creation???
shame!!!!!!!
ab