Meta-Blog

SEARCH QandO

Email:
Jon Henke
Bruce "McQ" McQuain
Dale Franks
Bryan Pick
Billy Hollis
Lance Paddock
MichaelW

BLOGROLL QandO

 
 
Recent Posts
QandO has Moved
The Ayers Resurrection Tour
Special Friends Get Special Breaks
One Hour
The Hope and Change Express - stalled in the slow lane
Michael Steele New RNC Chairman
Things that make you go "hmmmm"...
Oh yeah, that "rule of law" thing ...
Putting Dollar Signs in Front Of The AGW Hoax
Moving toward a 60 vote majority?
 
 
QandO Newsroom

Newsroom Home Page

US News

US National News
Politics
Business
Science
Technology
Health
Entertainment
Sports
Opinion/Editorial

International News

Top World New
Iraq News
Mideast Conflict

Blogging

Blogpulse Daily Highlights
Daypop Top 40 Links

Regional

Regional News

Publications

News Publications

 
Harriet Miers withdraws
Posted by: Jon Henke on Thursday, October 27, 2005

It's done. Harriet Miers is withdrawing her nomination. No real links yet, but the New York Times has an alert up.
Bush's Embattled Nominee to Supreme Court Withdraws
CNN reports...
President Bush "reluctantly" accepts Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers's request to withdraw her nomination.
I'll be anxious to hear Hewitt, et al, explain why Luttig/McConnell/Owens/etc will be a less qualified candidate that Harriet "Cool! Proportional representation!" Miers.

I have to believe that the vigorous opposition in the blogosphere played a large part in the outcome of this nomination—if not by actually changing minds in the White House, at least by building and fanning the flame of dissent among those on the Right. As powerful as the George Will and Charles Krauthammer columns were, I'm not sure that the pre-blogosphere punditocracy could have created such a furor.

MORE: The NYTimes has a story now...
President Bush said he reluctantly accepted her decision to withdraw, after weeks of insisting that he did not want her to step down. He blamed her withdrawal on calls in the Senate for the release of internal White House documents that the administration has insisted were protected by executive privilege.
Riiiiight.

James Joyner:
Let me be clear about something, though: While I am glad this is over, this controversy reflects badly on President Bush, not Harriet Miers. From all indications, Miers is a decent, honorable woman. The fact that she did not meet the incredibly high threshold of being qualified to sit on the Supreme Court is no shame. Unfortunately, the president put her in a position to become the target of public ridicule. She did nothing to deserve that.
Here's the withdrawal letter Miers' sent to President Bush. She appears to have run spell-check on this letter. Also, indicating she may be resigning altogether, she writes "I am most grateful for the opportunity to have served your Administration and this country." [Update: never mind. In his response, Bush says " I am honored that she will continue to serve our Nation as White House Counsel"]

Jonah Goldberg...
That is my only advice to Bush right now. No Gonzales, a thousand times no Gonzales.
(shudder)

UPDATE: Hugh Hewitt says Miers was "unfairly treated", and that "She and the president deserved much better from his allies". He gives no reason why she deserved support, and has not yet answered Baseball Crank's questions.

 
TrackBacks
Return to Main Blog Page
 
 

Previous Comments to this Post 

Comments
Good. It has come to the least bad of the possible endings.

Now, any predictions on what kind of person Bush will nominate next? Will he take a lesson from this and actually fulfill his campaign promises by nominating an ideological colleague of Thomas and Scalia? Or will he lash out at the conservative base by nominating someone that irritates them, but placates Democrats and moderate Republican senators enough to get through?

Now that Sandra Day O’Connor is hearing cases, I doubt that Bush will feel any urgency. He may take a while to assess this one. I hope so. That might make it more likely that he’ll get over any bad feeling about this nomination before making the next one.
 
Written By: Billy Hollis
URL: http://
NOW is the time to get the popcorn ready...this is going to be a Donneybrooke.

Question: Just prior to Miers being nominated there were other nominees that "withdrew" themselves. Any links to who withdrew??. Bush may be working off a shorter short list.
 
Written By: mark m
URL: http://
Good, the idiocy is over. The only real question here is will Bush pick someone to rally the base, or will he make another weakness pick?

 
Written By: shark
URL: http://
He may not have gotten as much blogospheric ink as Will, Krauthammer, NR or the WSJ, but don’t overlook Rush Limbaugh in this either. Rush’s opposition had to show the White House this wasn’t just a revolt of ivory tower intellectuals, and he reaches a lot more of the base than any of the publications do.
 
Written By: Crank
URL: http://www.baseballcrank.com
"Alas for poor Hugh, it seems the shit sandwich was like the McRib: a short-term promotional offering, not a permanent addition to the menu." -Allah
(the first comment in the thread)
 
Written By: Adam
URL: http://sophistpundit.blogspot.com
I’m wondering about the tactical use of the Miers Kerfuffle. I can’t imagine that Bush stumbled into this morasse by accident - and I suspect there was a larger strategy behind his intransigence and her subsequent withdrawal. In short, I think this whole thing was engineered for a reason.

A goal of any party in power that has ambitions to stay in power should work to appear to represent the entire spectrum of the electorate. This lulls political opponents into believing that the party can effectively represent their interests, and those of the entire nation.

From Hewitt to Bork, from Malkin to Morrisey, the nation has now seen the Conservative movement representing all aspects of the arguments for and against Bush’s nominee. I think this boosts the Republican party’s credibility as a national party, and I think it has helped to erode the hyper-partisanship of reasonable Democrats.
-Steve
 
Written By: Steve
URL: http://
All that really matters now is that Bush can once again put the Dems on the defensive. Lets get this festering sore lanced already. I think everyone on left and right has wanted this fight for awhile now. Each side thinks they have the upper hand. Nominate one of the justices who made it in via the filibuster compromise, and have at it already.

 
Written By: shark
URL: http://
Dr. Pournelle sums it up.
 
Written By: Mark A. Flacy
URL: http://
I am simply ashamed of the conservative wing of my party today. Ashamed.

I will not support my Senator if he was behind this treachery. I will withhold any contributions, and will sit home on election day to teach him a major lesson.

Don’t turn on the base. We elected you, and we can unelect you. Miers was the fifth vote to overturn Roe v. Wade. Now we have to nominate someone with a paper trail whom the Dems can filibuster next year, just as we get ready for midterms.

Those of you who wanted this should be ashamed. You bullied this woman into withdrawing.

Pathetic.
 
Written By: George Jones
URL: http://
Thank you George Jones

I’m sad to see Harriet withdraw. I don’t know whether she was qualified or not. The president thought so, and I would have liked to watched the hearings and decide for myself. Unfortunately on her way to the hearings she was lynched by the massa’s in the big house. I want to make up my own mind and I resent a$$holes like George Will and Bill Kristol deciding who I can listen to or not. That’s BULLSH*T!
 
Written By: Abu Qa’ Qa
URL: http://
STEVE, I have been thinking along the same lines, perhaps this was just a stalking horse for the real candidate.
 
Written By: Kyle N
URL: http://
STEVE, I have been thinking along the same lines, perhaps this was just a stalking horse for the real candidate.

Riiiight. Because this president has no history of cronyism. And it makes great sense to publicly state, "hey, I tried to do something stupid. But everyone stopped me."


 
Written By: PogueMahone
URL: http://
Miers was the fifth vote to overturn Roe v. Wade.
No, she wasn’t. IF she’d even vote that way—something you really have no idea about—she’d be the 4th vote. Roe V Wade would still be upheld 5-4.
I would encourage everyone to actually count the votes on the relevant case, Casey v. Planned Parenthood. You’ll see that Anthony Kennedy voted with the pro-choice majority there. O’Connor could be replaced by Tony Perkins himself and the core of abortion rights would still be in place.
In any event...
Those of you who wanted this should be ashamed. You bullied this woman into withdrawing.
Yeah, well competence seems more important to me than reliability on one vote.
 
Written By: Jon Henke
URL: http://www.QandO.net
George Jones, wrote:
Those of you who wanted this should be ashamed. You bullied this woman into withdrawing.
That statement is hilarious. I don’t think George Jones realizes it but if that is true then he shows the fallacy of his confidence that Miers’ was a vote against Roe.

If bloggers such as myself and McQ and Jon Henke and others, plus the commentary of columnists such as George Will can "bully" Miers into withdrawing her nomination to the Supreme Court, what makes him (or anyone, for that matter) think she would withstand the "bullying" of the pro-Roe mainstream like the New York Times and Washington Post and so forth not to overturn the decision?
 
Written By: William Thomas
URL: http://

 
Add Your Comment
  NOTICE: While we don't wish to censor your thoughts, we do blacklist certain terms of profanity or obscenity. This is not to muzzle you, but to ensure that the blog remains work-safe for our readers. If you wish to use profanity, simply insert asterisks (*) where the vowels usually go. Your meaning will still be clear, but our readers will be able to view the blog without worrying that content monitoring will get them in trouble when reading it.
Comments for this entry are closed.
Name:
Email:
URL:
HTML Tools:
Bold Italic Blockquote Hyperlink
Comment:
   
 
Vicious Capitalism

Divider

Buy Dale's Book!
Slackernomics by Dale Franks

Divider

Divider