As I predicted last weekend, Harriet Miers has withdrawn as a nominee to replace Sandra Day O'Connor on the Supreme Court. This paves the way for someone competent to be named to the court. But far more important than that, it wins me another dinner from my buddy Dan Ray. And that's what really matters, right?
In his statement accepting her resignation, Bush of course had to spread a little manure around that even a 10 year old would know is nonsense:
I understand and share her concern, however, about the current state of the Supreme Court confirmation process. It is clear that senators would not be satisfied until they gained access to internal documents concerning advice provided during her tenure at the White House -- disclosures that would undermine a president's ability to receive candid counsel.
Harriet Miers' decision demonstrates her deep respect for this essential aspect of the constitutional separation of powers -- and confirms my deep respect and admiration for her.
Oh yeah, George, her decision was made because of her deep respect for the separation of powers. Could she even give a passable answer on relevant court precedents regarding separation of powers? Highly unlikely. One really has to wonder what it would take to get Bush to admit that he made a mistake. No, George, this one sits squarely in your lap. She withdrew because you should never have nominated her in the first place. It was a monumentally bad decision on every possible level. The real story here is that, for once, our political system actually responded rationally to a really bad idea. As a general rule, really bad ideas get passed rather quickly.
Now the question is, who replaces her? Does Bush continue to look for a woman? Go for the first Hispanic on the court? Or does he go with a solid but confirmable conservative like McConnell or Luttig? I'll reveal my prediction as soon as I figure out what Dan's prediction is. Might as well make it three dinners, eh?
- Log in to post comments
I'll reveal my prediction as soon as I figure out what Dan's prediction is. Might as well make it three dinners, eh?
Very fucking funny, Mr. Comedian.
I've already said this to Ed privately, but now I'm making it public: if I ever offer to bet with Ed again on anything, I hereby consent to being beaten silly with a baseball bat. I can't win at anything -- poker, darts, Supreme Court nominees. I'm through.
So officially: I have no idea who Bush will nominate. Except I'm pretty sure it won't be Harriet Miers. Or me. So there, Ed. Now let's see your prediction.
If I was really cynical, I would think that Harriet's nomination was a political ploy. Knowing that the Grand Jury would expire in a few weeks, nominate a foot soldier willing to fall on their sword. As soon as the indictments are announced (or imminent), pull the trigger on the withdrawl. Sounds like classic Karl Rove.
It's too early to make a prediction, I think. It really depends on whether Bush still thinks he has to name a woman. Laura Bush apparently thinks so. His historical tendency in situations like this is to basically say "you're not the boss of me, I can do whatever I want" and name the most controversial person possible. In this case, that would be Janice Rogers Brown. But his political advisers would certainly try and talk him out of it. It's really about just how far gone Bush is at this point. If he's smart, he names McConnell to the seat and the confirmation sails through with nothing more than the usual sniping. But you could certainly go broke fast betting on Bush to do the smart thing, and I prefer to win my bets.
Thinking outside the box, does Rice really think she could be President, or is she someone he might put up for a life appointment??? The Hispanic vote is certainly a consideration given the desperate need to retain control of Congress next year. A Democratic house would surely impeach, and only a packed Court could save him.
LOL
Yeah, I expected to hear about the indictments (or no indictments) today, and I didn't expect Miers to back out so soon. It does seem like suspicious timing.
One more thought.... I wonder if the timing of this, which was going to happen anyway, is more about Rove and Libby et al, than about a Miers moment?
From a comment up-thread:
Rice will not be president any time soon. It is highly unlikely that many in the heartland would vote for a black woman for president any time soon. They might have voted for Jean Kirkpatrick (a white conservative woman--remember her?) but her day has passed. And they might have voted for a black male such as Colon Powell, but he made a fool of himself at the UN. He showed us pictures of what were supposedly Weapons of Mass Destruction, but when the US military went looking for them, they weren't there!
I frankly don't know any female--white or black, or even asian--coming down the pike, might be a viable candidate.
Might as well nominate Gonzalez. He's qualified enough; having been confirmed AG, the torture memos are now a dead letter; and he's got the same Executive Privilege cone of silence as Miers.
Sure, he's not a woman. But he's Hispanic. And there are Hispanic women, aren't there??
The lucky nominee is..... Samuel A. Alito from the 3rd circuit court of appeals in Philly. Supposed to be a Scalia clone. I'm sure Ed will have more to say.