On Miers

Posted on by

On Harriet Miers: Bleah.

I’m underwhelmed. I like superstar picks, particularly federal appellate judges (despite some calls for diversity). There’s nothing to say she’ll be an awful justice, but there’s nothing to say she’ll be a great one, either.

What are her views on the Constitution? Who knows? All I’ve read is that she’s pro-life.

And with Katrina and Brownie, is this really the time for Bush to name a crony? (That word is going to get tired really soon, but it’ll do for now.) Burton and Minton, Truman’s pals, were totally forgettable. Harriet Miers was the best he could do? It’s not the case that anyone would have paled in comparison to Roberts. There were a number of good choices out there.

Harry Reid apparently mentioned to Bush recently that she’d be an acceptable choice. So I’m guessing she’ll get confirmed. Even if she turns out not to be an intellectual powerhouse, she’ll have three or four clerks helping her out.

Anyway: bleah.

7 thoughts on “On Miers”

  1. Yeah, the Harry Reid psuedo-endorsement probably makes her a pretty safe bet… but I have read that there’s a decent chance the ABA will have a bunch of voters (however that works) vote “not qualified” and that she’ll probably end up with a “qualified” at best (as opposed to Roberts’ “well qualified”). If the ABA doesn’t endorse, that will provide some cover for Senators to vote against her.

  5. Andrew Sullivan is busy having a fit- the crony angle is freaking him out. The fact that she thinks George is such a smarty-pants is freaky. She is not qualified for the job.

  6. Is that really true Jeff??? Did Harry Reid endorse this woman? I heard her speak on C-Span’s ‘Washington Journal’ a few hours ago, and she sounded like an arch-conservative to me.

Comments are closed.