Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Reid's reaction to Mier nomination

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
thefloyd Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-08-05 10:31 AM
Original message
Reid's reaction to Mier nomination
I cannot figure out why Harry R. gave Bush the nod on
Mier. Did Reid calculate a Mier nomination would send W's base into a tailspin? Thus spliting up the conservative base into two more camps. Or was Reid just trying to act bipartisan. Someone help me come to a conclusion....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Skinner ADMIN Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-08-05 10:38 AM
Response to Original message
1. Only Reid knows for sure.
My best guess is that he was sincere in his reaction to Miers.

But if it was calculated to piss off the conservative base, it was fucking brilliant.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Neil Lisst Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-08-05 12:49 PM
Response to Reply #1
17. Skinner/your original post.
Edited on Sat Oct-08-05 12:51 PM by Neil Lisst
You wrote:

My best guess is that he was sincere in his reaction to Miers.

But if it was calculated to piss off the conservative base, it was fucking brilliant.
-------------------------------------------------

I think it has to be some of both. He absolutely told Bush during the past several weeks that she was the kind of appointment Bush should make. He probably figures she's as good as we will get. And, he had to know that putting his arm around her would send the rightwing into the stratosphere.

I recall that Reid is personally opposed to abortion, so it's ironic the right is so apoplectic over this appointment. Fact is, they wanted a true and loyal warrior for their causes, a LOCK, and they didn't get it.

-----
my progressive political cartoon
http://www.webcomicsnation.com/neillisst
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
thefloyd Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-08-05 01:01 PM
Response to Reply #1
18. I second the fucking brilliant if Reid's true
intent was dividing conservatives even more. Honestly, In my amateur opinion,4 or 5 years ago the GOP was unified no matter what the issue. Now it seems like conservatives are becoming single issue groups under one tent much like the Democractic party has been for so long. I am just speculating.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bumblebee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-08-05 10:40 AM
Response to Original message
2. I think it's the former +
the former because he knew it would split the base; + because he figured that even in the worst-case scenario she is probably not as bad as Owen et al (I think she actually is because she will just follow Scalia and Thomas in everything). Plus he supported her nomination and not her confirmation so he can change his mind once he learns more. He probably thought it was a win-win suggestion -- and he may have been right, judging by the rw reaction.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blondeatlast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-08-05 10:52 AM
Response to Reply #2
6. Notice how only Dobson is making statements, not Fallertson.
Robertson and Falwell appaear to be in the inner circle, which I attribute to their membership in the Heritage Foundation.

I don't think Dobson actually gets the memoes--at least not the inner-inner circle ones.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
enlightenment Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-08-05 10:42 AM
Response to Original message
3. Here's the auto-reply he sent to me on the subject.
Edited on Sat Oct-08-05 10:43 AM by enlightenment
I was furious about his support -- wrote a scathing letter, and told him that he'd lost my support (I live in NV). You'd think they would have an auto-reply for "voter who threatens to withdraw support in next election" but apparently not. Typical.
One can only hope that he has a plan -- but I doubt it.
-------------------
Dear :

Thank you for contacting me regarding the President's nomination of
Harriet Miers to the U.S. Supreme Court. I appreciate hearing your views on this subject.

On October 3, 2005, President Bush announced that he had nominated White House Counsel Harriet Miers to fill the seat vacated by retiring Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor. While I will not make a judgment until hearings on the nomination occur, I was generally pleased by the nomination. As White House Counsel, she has always worked with me in a courteous and professional manner. I am also impressed with the fact that she was a trailblazer for women as managing partner of a major Dallas law firm and as the first woman president of the Texas Bar Association.

In my view, the Supreme Court would benefit from the addition of a justice who has real experience as a practicing lawyer and who would bring a different and useful perspective to the Court. I am heartened that the President agrees.

I look forward to the Judiciary Committee hearings, which will help the American people to learn more about Harriet Miers and to help the Senate determine whether she deserves a lifetime seat on the Supreme Court. I understand the tremendous influence the Supreme Court wields over many aspects of American life. You may be assured that I will review all testimony and documents carefully and keep the views of my constituents in mind as the confirmation process moves forward.

Again, thank you for taking the time to share your thoughts with me. For more information about my work for Nevada, my role in the United States Senate Leadership, or to subscribe to regular e-mail updates on the issues that interest you, please visit my Web site at http://reid.senate.gov. I look forward to hearing from you in the near future.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
win_in_06 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-08-05 12:33 PM
Response to Reply #3
16. Courteous and Professional?
I'm am tired of hearing platitudes used as justification for a SCOTUS nomination.

We get enough of this from Bush.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kahuna Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-08-05 10:45 AM
Response to Original message
4. My thoughts on Mier and the Dem response is that the Dems will lose
credibility with the cronyism charge, if they approve the ultimate *crony to the SCOTUS. So whether they think she is a nice harmless woman, they must weigh very carefully the pros and cons of embracing this crony.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bernardo de La Paz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-08-05 10:51 AM
Response to Reply #4
5. They won't approve. Open question if enough Repub to get out of committee
And if she gets out of committee, open question if enough Republicans will vote for her on the floor.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bumblebee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-08-05 11:51 AM
Response to Reply #5
14. and for the Dems it's a much better outcome than having
to filibuster and thus provoke the nuclear option. Then if he nominates a real, known, hard-core conservative, people like Specter, Snowe, Chafee and perhaps 4-5 more won't have the stomach to confirm either, esp now that B is probably in the twenties among their constituents -- so it will get very interesting.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
thefloyd Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-08-05 01:11 PM
Response to Reply #14
21. Good points
Reid definitely threw the gavel in their court.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ochazuke Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-08-05 11:01 AM
Response to Reply #4
8. That's right
Hell, they would lose credibility as an opposition party.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Neil Lisst Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-08-05 01:05 PM
Response to Reply #4
19. Harriet Miers has been Bush's personal colostomy bag
Knowing she's been Bush's personal colostomy bag just makes her too low in my eyes to be worthy of the Supreme Court.

Put another way, what kind of self-respecting person would do that?

-----
my progressive political cartoon
http://www.webcomicsnation.com/neillisst
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
thefloyd Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-08-05 01:08 PM
Response to Reply #4
20. I am not so sure Democrats will
loose any traction in the Cronyism charge with approving Mier. Unlike Brownie's law degree Mier's will come in handy. I am not sure what credentials the Constitution requires for a supreme court nominee...Probablity just the ability to interpret the law.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blondeatlast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-08-05 10:57 AM
Response to Original message
7. Reid knows this has enough stamina to last through Repub fundraisiing,
IMHO.

The base appears to be quite vociferously split on Miers.
The fdundies and the lassez-faire (true conservative) factions are veruy much at odds.

I see this as a last-ditch power struggle in the Repubs to wrest control from the wingnut fundie faction, and I think Reid knows it too.

Either way, if it draws out the claws on both sides, I LIKE IT!

Pass the popcorn, please.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
msongs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-08-05 11:06 AM
Response to Original message
9. Reid's first loyalty is to the Mormon Church, not democrats. nt


Msongs
www.msongs.com/political-shirts.htm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Punkingal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-08-05 11:10 AM
Response to Reply #9
10. Bingo!!!!
Being a Nevadan, I know that is so true about Harry!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
McCamy Taylor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-08-05 11:21 AM
Response to Original message
11. Meirs is not "career SCOTUS" material. The Dems will replace her soon.
Edited on Sat Oct-08-05 11:22 AM by McCamy Taylor
Meirs has a short term assignment, overturn convictions of WH staff and squelch subpoenas of WH documents. Once her job is done, there is a strong chance she will resign and go back to doing what she likes to do---taking care of W.

Compare this to another Roberts, who will haunt the court for 30 years with his conservative mission, and I would say that Reid did the right thing in endorsing her.

THIS is the real reason the conservatives are hopping mad though they can not say it, because to say it would be to admit the unadmissable---their man's administration is morally corrupt.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Geek_Girl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-08-05 11:43 AM
Response to Reply #11
13. Good Point
Her age would suggest she won't be sitting on the bench very long.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Geek_Girl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-08-05 11:41 AM
Response to Original message
12. I think Reid is supporting her
to add fuel to the fire. By him giving his approval, makes the religious right even more infuriated and seem like Bush is caving into the dems. Reid is pretty shrewd IMHO.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bumblebee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-08-05 11:55 AM
Response to Reply #12
15. I agree. The utmost insult as felt by the conservatives is that
B. listened to (and was suckered by) Reid.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sat May 04th 2024, 04:52 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC