Tuesday, October 04, 2005

President Bush Nominates Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court

Who?

Yesterday in a jaw dropping, stunning announcement, President Bush nominated his good friend and, well, good friend Harriet Miers to take Justice O'Connor's position on SCOTUS. Ms. Miers just squeaked past Phil, the night custodian of the Whitehouse basement and Torrie an executive office intern who were also on the president's short list.

Ms. Miers list of accomplishments include taking third in her sixth grade spelling bee, being nominated the "most likely to be nominated to the supreme court" in her high school senior class and reading every John Grisham novel ever published.

All joking aside. Most conservatives are either completely confused or totally pissed off at the president's choice. Yes, you don't have to be a judge to be on the supreme court, but it sure as hell helps. Yes, she is technically qualified to be on the court, but she has never written an opinion, she has never even tried a case before the supreme court. Her lack of experience in constitutional law appears to be astounding. I have three possible explanations for Ms. Miers nomination, in no particular order.

1) She is a sacrificial lamb. The president knows that the democratic party is going to raise holy hell over whoever he nominates to the job. So, President Bush appeases the blood lust of the left by offering up a nominee who while technically qualified has no judicial experience. As the left tries to rip apart a straw woman, they look more hypocritical with each passing day.

2) She is a "stealth" nominee in a much more broad way than Roberts was. In this case we have no idea how she might rule on anything, much less the key issues of abortion, gay marriage, eminent domain, the pledge of allegiance etc. This way there is nothing the left can latch on to in attacking her credentials. This assumes that President Bush really knows how Ms. Miers feels on these issues.

3) She was nominated because she is a woman. Many have argued that since Justice O'Connor is stepping down, President Bush MUST nominate a woman in order to maintain the gender balance on the court. This reasoning is specious to say the least. There is nothing in the constitution that says that the court must have a particular makeup. Rather this is the judicial equivalent of affirmative action.

Now a potential fourth option would be that President Bush really does feel that Ms. Miers is fully qualified to do the job of a supreme court justice, and that her interpretation of the constitution falls in line with the promises he made. That is possible.

But be that as it may, I still want a ruthlessly conservative nominee. I want a judge who has a guillotine on his or her bench. I want a judge who has the constitution printed on his or her bed sheets. I want a judicial nomination that will send Senator Kennedy into apoplectic fits. I helped get this president elected. I voted for conservative values in the office of the president and the senate and house of representatives. I, as a voter, citizen and constituent deserve an openly conservative supreme court nominee.