Tuesday, October 04, 2005

If The Right's This Unhappy, Miers Can't Be All Bad

Even more so than Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid seeming so happy with the nomination of Harriet Miers to the U.S. Supreme Court -- Reid voted against John Roberts Jr. -- is the fact that our unsavory blogging counterparts on the Right seem so steamed over Bush's choice. Here's a sampling of reaction from conservative bloggers, upon hearing that Bush had not selected a known, far-right ideologue:

Ankle Biting Pundits
"Here's another question - when Miers comes under the inevitable attack by the left, why should conservatives go to the mat for her? What has she ever done to convince us she'd be in the mold of a Scalia or Thomas? Is Harriet Miers why the base was out knocking on doors and making phone calls? I don't think so. To use a phrase, conservatives really have no 'skin' in this game, and quite frankly many likely wouldn't be disappointed if she's rejected, which will at least give the President a chance to nominate someone that could fire up conservatives."
"Mr. President, you've got some explaining to do. And please remember - we've been defending you these five years because of this moment.

"There is profound disappointment today on the right. Harriet Miers was rumored as the next pick for the Supreme Court, but many people laughed off the suggestion. Some of those who were laughing are now crying. Still others are abandoning hope. Said one correspondent, 'This Presidency is adrift.' From what we have seen lately, we tend to agree."
Right Wing News
"George Bush's decision to appoint Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court is bitterly disappointing.

"Miers is a Bush crony with no real conservative credentials, who leapfrogged legions of more deserving judges just because she was Bush's pal. She used to be Bush's staff secretary for God's sake and now she's going to the Supreme Court while people like Michael Luttig, Priscilla Owen, Janice Rogers Brown & Emilio Garza are being left on the sidelines.

"To merely describe Miers as a terrible pick is to underestimate her sheer awfulness as a selection."
Michelle Malkin
"It's not just that Miers has zero judicial experience. It's that she's so transparently a crony/"diversity" pick while so many other vastly more qualified and impressive candidates went to waste. If this is President Bush's bright idea to buck up his sagging popularity--among conservatives as well as the nation at large--one wonders whom he would have picked in rosier times. Shudder."
Power Line
"I'm sure that she is a capable lawyer and a loyal aide to President Bush. But the bottom line is that he had a number of great candidates to choose from, and instead of picking one of them--Luttig, McConnell, Brown, or a number of others--he nominated someone whose only obvious qualification is her relationship with him."
Rich Lowry at The National Review
"Just talked to a very pro-Bush legal type who says he is ashamed and embarrassed this morning. Says Miers was with an undistinguished law firm; never practiced constitutional law; never argued any big cases; never was on law review; has never written on any of the important legal issues. Says she's not even second rate, but is third rate. Dozens and dozens of women would have been better qualified. Says a crony at FEMA is one thing, but on the high court is something else entirely. Her long history of activity with ABA is not encouraging from a conservative perspective--few conservatives would spend their time that way. In short, he says the pick is 'deplorable.'"
I love the smell of internal Republican dissent in the morning...