Further Proof That George W Bush is a Communist
Let me preface this with a note to new readers of this blog. Ever since the bitterly divisive election of 2004, with its talk of red states and blue states and the like, I have observed that there are still a number of people who only think in terms of "my party, right or wrong" and are incapable of thinking outside the lines. These people fall, naturally, into two groups, one of whom I have referred to as "baby seal clubbers" (after a Dave Barry joke about Spiro Agnew). The other group is referred to in this blog as "Communists."
It appears more and more that George W Bush may be falling into the latter category:
President George W. Bush on Monday nominated White House insider Harriet Miers for a Supreme Court vacancy, triggering outrage from conservatives who questioned whether she would uphold their political views....
Conservatives who formed the bedrock foundation of Bush's re-election last November immediately protested the nomination as a betrayal of his campaign promise to pick conservative judges, pointing to her past campaign donations to Democrats....
The White House noted some Democrats had urged Bush to consider the Dallas-born Miers but would give no names. One of those, however, was Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, a Nevada Democrat.
"I like Harriet Miers," said Reid, who had voted against John Roberts as U.S. chief justice in Roberts' confirmation vote last week. "In my view, the Supreme Court would benefit from the addition of a justice who has real experience as a practicing lawyer."
But some conservatives expressed concern that Bush had missed a historic opportunity to shift the balance of the court in a clear way by picking someone in the same mold as conservative justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas.
"It is very hard to avoid the conclusion that President Bush flinched from a fight on constitutional philosophy. Miers is undoubtedly a decent and competent person. But her selection will unavoidably be judged as reflecting a combination of cronyism and capitulation on the part of the president," said William Kristol, editor of the Weekly Standard magazine.
Manny Miranda, head of a conservative coalition called The Third Branch Conference, said Miers was "the most unqualified choice" for the high court since Lyndon Johnson tried to make Abe Fortas chief justice in 1968.
"I was hoping that the president would keep his campaign promise. He said he would name someone like Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas. We thought he meant someone with a clear judicial record on particular issues," Miranda said....
Records show Miers has given money over the years to both Republicans and Democrats, including $1,000 to Democrat Al Gore's presidential campaign in 1988.
In 1987 she gave $1,000 to former Texas Sen. Lloyd Bentsen. Bentsen was the Democratic vice presidential nominee who ran against Bush's father in 1988....
The offenses against humanity have resulted in criticism from the baby seal clubber front:
Betrayal: President Bush Ducks Confrontation in Selecting Miers
I am extremely disappointed and mad with President Bush for his selection of Harriet Miers to be the next SCOTUS Justice....
In March of 1987 she contributed $1000.00 to the Senator Lloyd Bentsen Election Committee; in February of 1988 she contributed $1000.00 to the Albert Gore Jr. for President Committee, Inc. (Al Gore? She actually considered Al Gore a reasonable choice?), in November of 1988 she donated $1000.00 to the DNC Services Corporation, LLC/Democratic National Committee. It was not until September of 1994 that she contributed to a Republican (Pete Sessions for Congress-$500.00).
Pssssst - even Reagan associated with Democrats. In fact, Reagan was a Democrat for some time. But this may not matter to those who believe that our civilization is in decline (Reagan's father in law supported abortion, after all):
It is the opinion of this Editor that President Bush is seriously wrong in his pick of Harriet Miers for the Supreme Court of the United States. The President made his pick from a position of weakness and unwillingness to engage the Liberal Democrats in the blood match they deserve. He should have picked the most politically and socially conservative strict constructionist available. He owes this to the so-called Christian Right that twice placed him in the White House. Instead, he appeased the Chuck Schumer's of the Senate, and America will pay the price with another Sandra Day O'Connor. Harriet Miers will blow like dust in the wind without any clear ideology or basis for her judgments. In essence, with two opportunities handed directly to him, George W. Bush has elected not to change the ideology or make up of the Supreme Court.
Decline Line blames RINO's like Arlen Specter, who have come to dominate the Republican party, as much as we criticize President Bush. A true conservative really has to ask if Senate fat cats...er...Republicans could muster the support to nominate an Owen or Brown to the SCOTUS. Doubtful. Too many political ramifications and repercussions.
And, turning to a one eye defense of civilization that notes a former party affiliation:
Harriet Miers? No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. Can you tell I am disappointed? Once again, Bush mistakes loyalty for competence. Miers is right on the reasonable cutoff age for a SCOTUS nominee (60), has never been a judge, isn’t an originalist, and worst, made campaign contributions to Democrats for years. At least O’Connor supported the GOP before being allowed to do her damage on the bench.
Former RNC head Ed Gillespie gave a lukewarm defense: she was a Democrat until 1992. Well, that’s reassuring. She was a Democrat until he GOP solidly came into power, then she switched loyalty. Well, I certainly wouldn’t want the dear woman to be on the outside looking in, now would I? The woman has no judicial or conservative experience, and her loyalties shift with the wind. What happens if Hillary picks off Louisiana and Florida in 2008? You think Miers will forget who brought her to the dance? Come on. It’ll be, “Bush who?” the moment she is confirmed....
Democrats.org links to other baby seal clubbers, while noting that this nomination proves that Bush is "politically weak":
The jury is still out on Harriet Miers. There are a lot of obvious concerns; her lack of experience, cronyism, and of course her views on our basic freedoms.
But one thing that's already clear is that a politically weak Bush was unable to pick a nominee that would appeal to his extreme right-wing base. Already this morning conservatives are up in arms over the nomination.
However, Democrats.org can't explain how they lost a party member.
But it seems that all of us have short memories. Remember back in the last millennium, when baby seal clubbers talked about how Bush could work with Democrats?
Avoiding confrontation, a proclivity toward bipartisanship and a distaste for details and long meetings is likely to be the style of a George W. Bush presidency.
As Texas governor, Bush has been able to work with Democrats on his agenda by cultivating personal relationships and avoiding confrontation on issues, especially controversial ones.
Even when the two parties didn't agree, Bush managed to maintain a friendly rapport with Texas Democrats....
Next you're gonna tell me that he actually ate with Democrats. (Ouch.) Ontario Christian won't let his grandkids go there, that's for sure.
Comments