Skip to main content

View Diary: What The Media Said About A Miers Withdrawal: Bush Weakness (339 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  A GW loss is not necessarily a victory for us. (none)
    And after Mier's pro-choice speech came out earlier this week, the anti-abortion types were going ape in attacking her.  I didn't hear Dobson defending her.  This is a victory for the Conservatives, pure and simple.  

    Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, a Nevada Democrat who had urged Bush to consider Miers for the court, charged, "The radical right wing of the Republican Party killed the Harriet Miers nomination.  Apparently, Ms. Miers did not satisfy those who want to pack the Supreme Court with rigid ideologues," Reid said.

    How big a victory depends on who GW nominates.  

    •  Yes, it is a (none)
      victory. Bush didn't want a contentious judicial battle this go around and he is getting what he didn't want. How is this not a victory for the opposition party? Reid is simply setting the stage for next nomination and putting the blame on right-wing so that Democrats don't get labelled as obstructionists. Regardless, everyone knows that the next nomination will be under tremendous scruitny with one crucial difference- Specter knows that he can hard ball with Bush nominees. Whether he will remains to be seen and ,like I mentioned, it may very well be snowing in DC next week.
      •  It's not a victory unless it accomplished (none)
        something valuable.  Energizing the movement conservatives is not valuable.  IF we get a bad nominee, that's not valuable.  IF that nominee gets on the Court, that's devastating.

        I think the press is right: This was no victory for the Dems.  Reid clearly doesn't think it was.  He's not crowing: "We won."  He's crowing: "We lost."

        •  Boy are you not getting it (none)
          Reid is getting ready for the next battle and you are lost in space on this.

          The SCOTUS is Extraordinary.

          by Armando on Thu Oct 27, 2005 at 08:34:42 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  No. (none)
            Reid is getting ready for the next battle.  But if you ask Reid would he rather have Miers or lose the next battle what will he answer?  My guess is that Reid recommended Miers because he ACTUALLY did think she was better than a lot of alternatives.  My guess is also that Reid is a realist that thinks the chances of the Dems winning a nomination battle are slim so he was probably pretty happy when the President took into consideration his input.  I think his answer will depend on who is nominated.

            My overall view is that those who believe that Reid pushed Miers so she'd fail and GW would be embarassed are deluding themselves.  I don't think Reid is that Machiavellian.  I think he's a straighter shooter.

        •  Nothing valuable is (none)
          going to come out of a successful Republican nomination. Good will come out of this defeat if Democrats play it right and Reid's response gives me hope. You see, President is now weak.He couldn't get away by appointing a crony and this is good news for Democrats. Movement conservatives can crow all they want, they now know that they cannot trust their President's choice going forward. Democrats now know that President isn't as resolute anymore. This is a win-win situation. It is not that Democrats have lost a stellar SC nominee with Meirs' withdrawal. She was a crony who made Bush look bad and that is a victory.
          •  What I find ironic is that you and Armando (none)
            are pushing contrary positions and that essentially makes my point.

            I'll be ecstatic about this if we ultimately end up with a better S.Ct. Justice than Miers would have been.  I'm not optomistic.  

            Recent revelations on Miers caused me to view her in a more favorable light since she was looking pro-choice.  I wish she would have gotten to the hearings, and we could've heard her views.  I think Armando's meme would have been better established if she would have come out pro-choice and then lost Republican support on the up or down vote, or even in committee.  Withdrawal is a worst case for me.

            •  This is a victory (none)
              , regardless. You've every right to be pessimistic. I refuse to be optimistic about any Bush nominee. I refuse to accept that Miers was a good SC nominee, she wasn't qualified. I love that she made Bush look bad and weak. As far as next nominee is concerned, we'll cross the bridge when we are there. However, as long as Democrats are willing to extract full political mileage out of next nomination I don't have a problem. You see, I never expect Bush to nominate good nominees. I , however , expect Democrats to exploit those nominations. Bush lost today and this is a Democratic victory.
        •  Bush was criticised for (none)
          not being capable of picking a nominee. If the next one is a right-winger, the Dems can block her on those grounds. Bush's reputation was hammered into the ground. I think this is no loss for us.
      •  That's ridiculous (none)
        He didn't want a battle with his own party - namely the conservative base.  You've got to be smoking some good stuff to assume this withdrawal has anything to do with possible contention from Democratic Senators.

        We won't know until the successor to O'Connor is swarn in, but it is fair to assume that GW Bush will find the best possible stealth nominee he can who is not as old, with a background that indicates they're far more likely to agree with the Scalia, Thomas and Roberts wing of the Court than the middle or left.  That is undoubtedly a loss for the progressive movement, and anyone who says otherwise is blinded by their hatred/opposition of Bush.

        Hey Roberts lovers, a link to a CNN story PRIOR to the nomination: Big Biz Draws Up Supreme Court Wish List

        by DWCG on Thu Oct 27, 2005 at 08:40:24 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Oh please. (none)
          He had Dobson and others lined up to placate the base. He withdrew because he knew this fight was going to be contentious(See Committee's response to Miers' questionairre) and he wasn't ready to expose his unqualified nominee to close scrutiny. He went with a stealth nominee because he didn't want a fight. he withdrew her when it became clear that he had a fight on his hand. Why is this so difficult to understand?
          •  He withdrew his nominee (none)
            because the right wing went ape when her pro-choice speeches emerged, on top of her pro-AA comments, her pro-tax comments, her pro-minority empowerment comments, her support for feminist speakers seminars, and her opposition to the Federalist Society.  This was never about qualifications.
            •  The nomination (none)
              was doomed the day Leahy and Specter told Bush white house to not expect any leniency in committee after they completely botched the questionairre. The death of nomination was sealed this weekend at Camp David. Her pro-choice speeches emerged because she was going down, not why she went down. Speeches don't emerge on their own, you know.
              •  The speeches emerged (none)
                because the neo-cons and movement conservatives formed a lynching party and have been trying to sabotage her from day one.  Her nomination was doomed as soon as she was no longer "safe" on Roe for the religious conservatives who were inclined to support her.
                •  Religious conservatives (none)
                  were not going to defend her anyway.They were going to tolerate her because of their leaders but defend her? No way. Dobson and others were brought in because religious right is a pyramidal structure and people like Dobson have disproportionate amount of power. And Roe is not a major issue for top movement conservatives who don't belong to religious right. She went down because she was unqualified and because Bush white house had no appetite for a contentious fight. I don't have a problem crediting religious right for nuking this nomination but it is a fact that most of their leaders had already fallen in line.
                  •  You are just wrong. (none)
                    Bork was Bork'd because he actually stood up and said Roe was bad law.  Abortion is a key element of the Federalist Society's philosophy.

                    After the 1993 speech, the conservatives who were willing to support her because of the anti-abortion issue jumped ship and she was doomed.  

                    This was never an issue about qualifications.  It was about abortion and the Federalist Society pique about the rejection of their own candidates.

    •  Which proves Reid gets it (none)
      and you don't.

      The SCOTUS is Extraordinary.

      by Armando on Thu Oct 27, 2005 at 08:33:48 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site