"The Best I could find"...

[SheetWise]

As strategy, it would be brilliant. Think back to the Gov. Blanco/Bush fiasco. There are at least three people who know what really happened -- Blanco, Bush, and Miers. Blanco won't talk. If Bush talked, it would seem petty and self serving -- that leaves Miers. Whatever advice she gave Bush would cut to the core of her understanding and belief re: Constitutional rights Federal vs. State. -- so we should expect the subject to come up in the confirmation process. This gets the story out. There are any number of ways to back out gracefully.

[andyfox]

Every politician is a liar. Supposedly, Harry Reid told Bush that he liked the woman and thought she could get through smoothly. She's the best Bush could find and get through given his current poll ratings.

[ACPlayer]

[ QUOTE ]
Bush is a liar at least some of the time

[/ QUOTE ]

Like the answer to the question about lawyers.

Q: How do you know when Bush is lying?

[Cyrus]

[ QUOTE ]
Miers
Bush actually says that Miers is the best he could find...WTFO?

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, what Bush claimed is technically correct.

It all depends where he looked!

...Just thought I'd step in MMMMMM's obstinate shoes while he is busy getting decommissioned from the Moderator gig.

[Dynasty]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

the best he could find...
for the mission, not the job. [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]


[/ QUOTE ]

So what happens if she is confirmed?


[/ QUOTE ]

She'll vote the conservative side of nearly every issue that comes before the court. I find it hard to believe Bush didn't directly ask her "Would you overturn Roe vs. Wade if you had the chance?"

[Cyrus]

[ QUOTE ]
Please explain this gameplan [behind the Miers nom]. I've never heard it. I find it very unlikely, but maybe you could change my mind with more explaining.

[/ QUOTE ]

Bush nominates a person that will get lukewarm support from his supporters, reaction from the Extreme Right and some support from the liberals (who feared worse). He picks a contributor to the Gore '88 campaign. He shows he is a uniter. He shows he does not pick candidates on the basis of their ideology.

Only thing is, the girl is not technically that qualified. Her nom looks likely to get shot down, possibly with bi-partisan opposition. She withdraws. Or better yet her nom is voted down!

Bush introduces the real deal, a true-blue conservative. The nation looks forward to closing this divisive episode and the pressure by media and Democratic moderates alike is on the liberals to allow the president's selection through.

...You think this is too clever? I think it's a possibility. The curerent administration had weirder ideas in the past.

[West]

[ QUOTE ]
Bush nominates a person that will get lukewarm support from his supporters, reaction from the Extreme Right and some support from the liberals (who feared worse). He picks a contributor to the Gore '88 campaign. He shows he is a uniter. He shows he does not pick candidates on the basis of their ideology.

Only thing is, the girl is not technically that qualified. Her nom looks likely to get shot down, possibly with bi-partisan opposition. She withdraws. Or better yet her nom is voted down!

Bush introduces the real deal, a true-blue conservative. The nation looks forward to closing this divisive episode and the pressure by media and Democratic moderates alike is on the liberals to allow the president's selection through.

...You think this is too clever? I think it's a possibility. The curerent administration had weirder ideas in the past.

[/ QUOTE ]

good call

[giddyyup]

[ QUOTE ]
Bush introduces the real deal, a true-blue conservative. The nation looks forward to closing this divisive episode and the pressure by media and Democratic moderates alike is on the liberals to allow the president's selection through.

[/ QUOTE ]

But, doesn't the grounds upon which the right-wing was able to force Miers' withdrawl justify the left taking the same positions towards the Scalia/Thomas clone Bush will soon nominate?

1. Every president deserves an up or down vote on their judicial nominees. Well, except Miers.

2. The ability of a president to nominate a "blank slate" and refuse to release documents that are relevant towards determining the nominee's competence and point of view on constitutional issues.

3. Concerns about the ideology of a candidate. If Miers was not ideological enough to the right, why cannot a candidate be too ideological to the left?

4. Miers did not pass the abortion litmus test. Similarly to # 3, if the right gets a litmus test, why cannot the left have one, and thereby demand a nominee who has views similar to O'Conner on abortion and privacy?

Expect a filibuster battle, but don't make any party a significant favorite to win that battle just yet.