2008 Woodie Awards
Miers' nomination puts White House in tough position in short and long term
Dane Schumann
Issue date: 10/27/05 Section: Opinion
- Page 1 of 1
It is clear that the Bush White House is in engaged in a fight for its life as of late. Slow response time to Katrina, ever-constant violence in Iraq, looming charges by Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald and many other issues have plagued the second term of a president who won re-election not quite year ago.
The White House had a chance to unify its base and reshape a Supreme Court that many view as being activist into one that would be jurisprudentially conservative. Instead, however, the president dropped the ball by making the tactical error of nominating Harriet Miers to the Court.
Conservatives know that the issue of judges and jurisprudence is winning one for them. By nominating a stealth-candidate the president has ducked a fight the he, his Washington colleagues and base could have won. Now he faces supporters (and perhaps a base) that are growing increasingly unsupportive of him. It seems that this issue of Miers is the straw that broke the camels back in that Bush's popularity had become a tolerable liability for his Republican comrades until Miers was elevated from obscurity.
Furthermore, those who believe that the senate hearings will reveal some kind of positive anomaly are mistaken, I believe. She will have to toe every political line ever drawn during the hearings and such efforts will effectively cloud her legal philosophy in such a way that it will seem the entire charade will be a collection of din regarding statements on law and constitutional philosophy rather than an insight into Miers' views.
And if the senate does not confirm the nominee the president's next choice will be even weaker in terms of their jurisprudential philosophy than Miers.
Conservatives can remember the political assassination of Robert Borke, his consequent defeat and then replacement by Anthony Kennedy in 1987 but in that case, forces defeated Ronald Reagan outside of his party. The case with this nominee could indeed be quite different. Such a turn of events, no matter which side of the political isle the attacks come from, is not one deemed desirable by any administration.
If such a thing were to take place again, it is likely that the president will look back on his choice and wish he had realized the political reality of his situation better than he had.
The White House had a chance to unify its base and reshape a Supreme Court that many view as being activist into one that would be jurisprudentially conservative. Instead, however, the president dropped the ball by making the tactical error of nominating Harriet Miers to the Court.
Conservatives know that the issue of judges and jurisprudence is winning one for them. By nominating a stealth-candidate the president has ducked a fight the he, his Washington colleagues and base could have won. Now he faces supporters (and perhaps a base) that are growing increasingly unsupportive of him. It seems that this issue of Miers is the straw that broke the camels back in that Bush's popularity had become a tolerable liability for his Republican comrades until Miers was elevated from obscurity.
Furthermore, those who believe that the senate hearings will reveal some kind of positive anomaly are mistaken, I believe. She will have to toe every political line ever drawn during the hearings and such efforts will effectively cloud her legal philosophy in such a way that it will seem the entire charade will be a collection of din regarding statements on law and constitutional philosophy rather than an insight into Miers' views.
And if the senate does not confirm the nominee the president's next choice will be even weaker in terms of their jurisprudential philosophy than Miers.
Conservatives can remember the political assassination of Robert Borke, his consequent defeat and then replacement by Anthony Kennedy in 1987 but in that case, forces defeated Ronald Reagan outside of his party. The case with this nominee could indeed be quite different. Such a turn of events, no matter which side of the political isle the attacks come from, is not one deemed desirable by any administration.
If such a thing were to take place again, it is likely that the president will look back on his choice and wish he had realized the political reality of his situation better than he had.