Apparently, Harriet Miers was a lot more moderate than I'd ever imagined. (And note I use the term "moderate" where most would use the term "liberal." If it describes the left-end of the political spectrum, "liberal" has to mean something more extreme than support for wealth equality, women's bodily integrity, and LGBT equality, because those values are quite moderate.)
Anyway, I've seen a lot of information that conservatives have found very upsetting about Harriet Miers. This one, however, takes the cake without a doubt.
From
LA Times
LaRue of Concerned Women said that reports about Miers' speeches, which were among documents provided to the Judiciary Committee last week, were the final straw that led the group to openly oppose her nomination. She pointed in particular to a 1993 address by Miers to Executive Women of Dallas, a nonprofit organization of professional women and those in upper management.
According to a transcript of her remarks, Miers expressed the view that women should be allowed to make their own decisions about abortion -- a sharp departure from her stance in 1989, when as a candidate for the Dallas City Council, she pledged to work against Roe vs. Wade and promote a state measure outlawing abortion.
In the speech, Miers said that "abortion clinic protesters have become synonymous with terrorists" and that the courts were being "besieged" by cases challenging a woman's right to choose abortion.
"The ongoing debate continues surrounding the attempt to once again criminalize abortions or to once and for all guarantee the freedom of the individual woman's right to decide for herself whether she will have an abortion," Miers told the group.
She added: "The underlying theme in most of these cases is the insistence of more self-determination. And the more I think about these issues, the more self-determination makes the most sense. Legislating religion or morality we gave up on a long time ago."
This, it would seem, is the smoking gun. Unless, Ms. Miers has had a revelation in between 1993 and today (and we all know how common it is for women aged 48-60 to abruptly change their views on abortion, yes? I think not.), she seems to be just as moderate on that issue as many of us suspected... or as many Republicans fear. It makes sense, because I've never believed the GOP establishment was anywhere near pro-life in practice as they are in their preachings. Were Roe to be overturned, they'd lose their most single motivating issue and the economic and pragmatic consequences would be horrible. But getting the anti-abortion crowd's hopes so riled up, having them believe that this mediocre, lazy rich kid from Connecticut (er... "Texas") was their Messiah, sent to save them from the diabolical judicial fiat of 1973 only to see Harriet Miers end up on the bench might be enough to disspirit the fundie crowd for good. And how for the better that would be for everyone. Not only have they poisoned government, but their unsavory engagement with politics has greatly cheapened and image of religion itself.
Any thoughts?