Politics

Captain Ed who is celebrating his two year blog anniversary said on the Miers nomination.

Not only does Harriet Miers not look like the best candidate for the job, she doesn’t even look like the best female candidate for the job. If judicial experience is a liability, why not Maureen Mahoney, who is younger, has argued cases at the Supreme Court, and worked within the Deputy Solicitor’s Office after clerking for William Rehnquist? Better yet, why not nominate J. Michael Luttig or Michael McConnell, with their brilliant and scholarly approaches to the law and undeniable qualifications through years of judicial experience? Why not Edith Hollan Jones, if Bush wanted to avoid the confrontation that Janice Rogers Brown would have created?

Miers may make a great stealth candidate, but right now she looks more like a political ploy. Color me disappointed in the first blush.

John Hawkins at Right Wing News posted.

George Bush’s decision to appoint Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court is bitterly disappointing.

Miers is a Bush crony with no real conservative credentials, who leapfrogged legions of more deserving judges just because she was Bush’s pal. She used to be Bush’s staff secretary for God’s sake and now she’s going to the Supreme Court while people like Michael Luttig, Priscilla Owen, Janice Rogers Brown & Emilio Garza are being left on the sidelines.

To merely describe Miers as a terrible pick is to underestimate her sheer awfulness as a selection.

People didn’t like Roberts’ track record? Miers has never been a judge, so she has almost no track record. She’s 60 years old, which is getting up there for a Supreme Court selection. Not only will she not excite the base like a Janice Rogers Brown, Miers selection will lead to a wave of attacks on the President by conservatives. Moreover, not only is there no guarantee that Miers will be another "Scalia or Thomas," it’s an open question whether she’ll be as conservative as Sandra Day O’Connor.

Keep in mind that we’re talking about a woman who has donated to Al Gore, Lloyd Bentsen, & the Democratic National Committee before. You want a candidate who has "Souter" written all over her? You want a candidate who can’t be trusted to overturn Roe v. Wade? Well, her name is Harriet Miers.

This is undoubtedly the worst decision of Bush’s entire presidency so far.

Though John Podhoretz at the Corner notes that "And those 1988 contributions could well have been "bundles" — meaning that the collection plate was passed around at her law firm so that some leading partner could be a high-dollar-raising Dem muckety-muck and she wasn’t in a position to say no."

I am rather disappointed myself in that it certainly looks this was not a great pick. Though I guess again the President is not worried about public perception and other demands. He nominated Roberts at the time when there was pressure to directly make a woman’s seat on the Supreme Court. Now he has nominated someone he has worked with for years despite the fact that the charge of cronyism in his appointments has gotten much attention recently. Though it might be that he has bowed to pressure by selecting people who will have an easier time going through the nomination hearings. Personally I was hoping for a fight and that the Democrats would filibuster the nomination finally forcing spineless Republican leaders to act. Though maybe I still may not be disappointed in that regard since they are probably already searching for a pretext that she presents "extraordinary circumstances" and should be filibustered. I can hardly wait for the first NARAL ads linking here to abortion bombings somewhere.

The downside to the fact that she had no judicial track record is that we don’t know her judicial temperament. Even though there have been articles that claim she is firmly anti-abortion as a judge her reading and interpretation of the Constitution is of primary importance. Her predecessor was also suppose to be against abortion but managed to have judicial hallucinations that by squinting your eyes in the right way enabled you to see penumbras and other emanations coming from the Constitution. Of course if she does become a good justice her age will limit the legacy of this, though if she becomes another O’Connor or worse a Souter that would be the upside.

Though there is couple thing I can say in support of Harriet Miers. She is not Atty. Gen. Alberto Gonzales and she sure can handle tough questions.

Alex, from Fargo, North Dakota writes:
Could you explain how Barney plays horseshoes?

Harriet Miers

The President throws the horseshoes to Barney, and Barney runs after them. Metal horseshoes are too heavy for Barney to lift, so he doesn’t carry them around. Instead he moves them around with his nose. He has figured out pretty quickly how to get under the horseshoe enough to flip it over. As you know, the President loves horsing around with Barney.

Catholic Analysis posts on a interesting contrast.

As a native New Orleanian, I have continued to follow Louisiana politics closely over the past few years. So I recall things that many of my readers would really have no reason to be aware of or remember as non-Louisianians. I recall a recent U.S. Senate election in Louisiana in which incumbent Democratic Senator Mary Landrieu was running for re-election. The election was on a Saturday. By Saturday afternoon on election day, Sen. Landrieu noticed and became concerned that turnout in the heavily Democratic black neighborhoods of New Orleans appeared to be lagging. That was bad news for the Democratic Senator. So the political machine cranked up and voters were quickly and efficiently transported to the polls in the very same black neighborhoods that have now been devastated by the hurricane. When an election was at stake, plenty of poor black New Orleanians were aggressively picked up and taken to the polls.

There is some evidence to back up reports of vote-hauling here.

…"Well, my friend had asked me did I want to go vote," another New Orleans woman told a Jenkins investigator. "She said they was paying people to go vote for this person. I say who was the person? She say Mary, Mary Landrieu." The woman got in a van that had three bench seats behind the driver and was driven to three polling places and given a LIFE sample ballot off which to vote. She was promised $25 for each stop. "Hey, hey all I got was $25!" she complains in the interview. "We went to three places. The agreement was we was supposed to get $25 each place." As consolation, she was given a Mary Landrieu T-shirt: "They promise you, and then they going give us ol’ stanky T-shirt with her picture on it." (She threw the T-shirt away in a dumpster.)

…One teller at a bank in Coushatta, La., reports that a woman cashed a $50 check from the Democratic party on November 5 and explained that it was given "to me to haul my kind of people to vote." Two other $50 checks from the party showed up the next day.

…A New Orleans man told a Jenkins investigator that he went to three different polling places and voted at each four or five times. He says he was paid $60 for each stop, was carried in a van with several other people, and was handed a yellow sample ballot that fits the description of the LIFE sample ballot (differently colored sample ballots, distributed in massive quantities on election day, are the hallmarks of the various New Orleans political organizations). The man says he didn’t have to sign in or stand in line at the various polling places.

…All the interviews follow a similar pattern: An election worker promises someone money to vote; he transports him to the polls in a car or van full of people; he gives him a LIFE ballot to show him for whom and for what to vote; the voter either signs his name at multiple polling places or doesn’t sign at all or, in one case, signs someone else’s name. Some of the interviews suggest a fairly well-organized effort. One woman says that she was taken in a van to a polling place where she voted twice, once in her own name, the second time in a name given to her by the driver. She says the driver selected who would vote at which polling places.

Beyond just the question of vote-buying or repeat voting In Louisiana it is actually illegal to rent vans or buses for the purpose of transporting people to the poll, though this does not apply to private parties using their own vehicles without any compensation bringing people to the polls. These laws were passed because of a long association between vote hauling and vote buying in Louisiana.

So if another hurricane ever hits there on election day they might already have the buses ready this time.

More evidence that George W. Bush is different than his father. Thank you President Bush for selecting Judge Roberts, someone who actually believes in the Constitution as it was written. I know for myself if I ever saw a living Constitution I would get out my Holy Water and dowse it generously. So it will be good to have another pro-Constitution judge especially since this also means a pro-life judge. The fact that his wife Jane has served as executive vice president of Feminists for Life is also a good sign.

That the President didn’t bow to political correctness and think that he had to replace a women with a women is amazing in this day in age. Not that there weren’t some good women on the short list, but it looks like W was playing rope-a-dope with us today with all the talk about Edith Clement being the pick. That we were soon to have a potential Ms. Souter.

Like I quipped before in before in Cacciaguida’s comment box. "You can’t have your court and Edith too."

Anyway more details over at Catholics in the Public Square and of course Southern Appeal.

WASHINGTON, June 30 /Christian Wire Service/ — Fidelis, a new Catholic-based organization, today launched an advertising campaign in the run-up to the Senate confirmation hearings to fill a Supreme Court vacancy. Their initial round of ads are beginning in Washington, D.C. and cite the role that anti-religious bigotry has played in recent Senate confirmation battles. The newspaper ad highlights religiously intolerant remarks by Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean, and calls on him to keep religion out of future Supreme Court confirmation hearings.

Fidelis President Joseph Cella stated: "This is the opening salvo in the Supreme Court confirmation battle that will likely commence any time in the next year. By shining a bright light on these outrageously intolerant remarks we hope to put an end to them or at lease deter others from embracing them. That’s why we will be airing ads in Washington, D.C. and the home states of those who practice this vile brand of hate politics."

The first ad includes a quote from Dean referring to Conservative Christians at a June 6, 2005 press conference in San Francisco, saying: "They are not very friendly to different kinds of people…they all behave the same and they all look the same." The second round of advertising begins next week in Nevada.

The ads cite the precedent of William Pryor who faced similar bigoted attacks during his confirmation hearings. Cella added: "Bill Pryor was routinely vilified for having "deeply-held" religious beliefs, he was mocked for living those beliefs, and faced sharply abusive rhetoric before he was finally confirmed to the federal bench. Given this history, we are anticipating that when a Supreme Court vacancy occurs, the religious faith of any potential nominee will play a large role in the debate over his or her confirmation."

Cella stated: "It is vital that we expose this trend of anti-religious bigotry before it is used against any nominee. It will not go unanswered. Catholics and all people of faith must join together and defend Supreme Court nominees who will likely be attacked because of their faith and deeply-held beliefs."

"Certain members of the United States Senate have a track record of dragging nominees through the mud because they practice their faith. It is unconstitutional, and we are drawing a line in the sand. Everyone, Republican, Democrat or Independent, engaged in smearing a person’s faith will be held accountable," stated Cella.

Cella said "A judicial candidate promising to uphold the law is not enough for many Senators. In order to disqualify a particular judicial candidate, some Senators have resorted to a quasi-inquisition of a candidates’ personal religious beliefs, and this cannot be tolerated." [Source]

There has been more and more speculation that the Chairman of the DNC Howard Dean is going to be replaced at some point. After his latest comments that the Republican Party was "pretty much a white, Christian party." He has been increasingly criticized by fellow Democrats including recently Sen. Barack Obama and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi. John Hawkins of Right Wing News correctly calls him the human gaffe machine. Besides the irony of his latest dumb statement coming from a white man and self-identified Christian which is pretty funny coming from a man who was a Governor of a state that pretty much always has a "white" Christmas. I find it funny that of course Dean’s counterpart Ken Melman is in fact Jewish and this speech coming days before Janice Rogers Brown is finally confirmed. Really none of this is surprising coming from a party where the word Christian is more and more a pejorative.

I really don’t believe that Howard Dean is going to be let go though anytime soon. When he was elected he was a known quantity. There can be no really shock since he would put his foot in the mouth so many times that he has developed athlete’s mouth. The Democratic party is known for sticking with disastrous choices. Terry McAuliffe headed defeat after defeat where each and every election was his Waterloo. Howard Dean is only channeling the Democratic Party and the things he says are only what many of them really believe. He view is after all no different than the editorial page of the NY Times. Democrats have embraced many losing causes and are loyal to those dragging the party down, so I really doubt that Mr. Dean we be shown the door anytime soon. Republicans of course have the opposite problem and will throw one of their members (or a judicial nominee) under a bus at the first possibility of things going awry even if not quite true.

The only caveat to what I say is concerning Deans fundraising capabilities for the DNC. So far they have been disastrous with the RNC have raised 3 to 4 times more money in the same time. Terry McAuliffe for all of his faults brought in the bucks. They might accept Mr. Dean in a tinfoil hat, but not if he bankrupts the party. I mean they have to have money to competively lose elections. Some have speculated that Howard Dean was chosen to make Hillary Clinton look moderate by comparison. I don’t buy that at all. There is just no good political comparison to use of how this has ever succeeded and why anybody would think that it could. Howard Dean was chosen because many Democrats think he is brave for telling it as it is. There is no sticker shock – his quirks were already on the sticker for everyone to see.

But who am I to say. I am just a white Christian who has never worked a day in my life. Though I still think the graphic in this post explains it all.

Great interview by John Hawkins of Right Wing News with Sen Sam Brownback. Especially interesting what his opinion about the need for a Constitutional amendment to protect marriage and that his number one priority if he was allowed to select legislation would be to protect the child in the womb and from human embryos being used as research. He was also a lot more forthcoming about Presidential ambitions then others currently being considered. I think he is a pretty good man (an a fairly recent Catholic convert to boot), but I don’t think that Senator’s make very good presidential candidates – as history bears out.

TRENTON — New Jersey funny man Joe Piscopo said Tuesday he will consider running for governor if voters just ask, marking another playhouse-to-statehouse switch pursued by marquee names such as Ronald Reagan and Arnold Schwarzenegger.

"I am flattered most of all that people in the state that I love . . . think I could be the guy to represent them," Piscopo said in an interview.

"All I am concerned about is doing what’s right for New Jersey," Piscopo said. "If there were enough people that said, "Run, Joe, run! We are so ticked off. You’ve got to be there for us,’ then I would consider it very seriously."

…"Abortion? I don’t think the government has any right to tell a woman what to do with her body. . . . And I am a church-going Catholic," Piscopo said. [Source]

Catholic? That’s strange, I always figured him for an ePISCOPOlian.

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger appeared Sunday on "This Week with George Stephanopoulos." I transcribed part of the interview from what was played today on the Laura Ingraham show which I had recorded.

GS: You’re a Catholic, how do you reconcile your political positions on abortion, on gay rights, on the death penalty. There opposed to the positions of the Catholic Church – how do you reconcile that:

AS: That’s easy, I never had one sleepless night over it

GS: So do I.

AS: Because it makes no difference to me I represent the people of California. The people of California not all of them are Catholics. So therefore I do not bring in my religion into this whole thing. As a matter of fact religion should have no effect on politics. If you make a decision it should not be based on religious beliefs it should be based on what is it and how can you represent the people of California the best possible way. We have a combination, we have Jews, we have Christians, we have Hindus, we have Buddhists, all kinds of different religions here and they say there is a 140 some religions in this state and I have to represent all of them and make the decisions based on what’s best for the state.

GS: So your faith plays no role in the forming of your political philosophy?

AS: Not for me, there are people who do it and for me I do not make decisions based on what has, what I have learned through my Bible studies, what I have learned through my religious classes in schools or when I went to Sunday school in Austria.

I guess Arnold doesn’t have to channel John Kerry since John Kerry is still alive (I am not speaking politically here), but it is a pretty close simulation of the distorted reasoning we heard on the campaign trail this year. This idea that politician have to be morally schizophrenic in a democracy. That there moral values must be locked up in one part of their brain so as to not contaminate their political actions. If we had to program Star Trek robots with this philosophy they would go into paradox meltdown as soon as you hit the on switch. With this type of logic you could not represent anyone because it is very rare (if it ever happens) to have issues where there is a one hundred percent concurrence. In almost every instance you are making a decision that goes against what some group of people believe. What is worse though is not that politicians say such nonsense, but that they can usually say it with the majority not blinking an eye or screaming in pain from a sprain due to to twisted logic.

With Tom Daschle loss there has been much talk about his replacement being Nevada Senator Harry Reid. He has a 55 percent pro-life rating according to the National Right to Life Committee which according to NRO: The Corner notices that during the 105th, 106th, and 107th Congresses that Reid received a higher rating then Senator Specter. So this would be quite a positive step in the right direction in the Democrat’s leadership to have someone that doesn’t automatically kowtow to Planned Parenthood and other abortion advocates.

The only problems is is that I am highly skeptical that this will actually come to pass. I expect a bait and switch where pro-life hopes are lifted and then a same old pro-abortion Senator will be the minority leader instead. Just as many pro-lifers are upset at the idea of Arlen Specter heading the judiciary committee I just can’t see the predominately pro-abortion Democrat senators going along with this. I would love to be wrong about this and supposedly he already has firm support from 30 members including some very pro-abortion ones. Again even if he does take a leadership role I am not that optimistic about just how pro-life he will be since he met with Kate Michelman, leader of the National Abortion Rights Action League. If NARAL doesn’t come out against this then you know he gave them some assurances.

Some bloggers on Democratic Internet sites on Wednesday questioned Reid’s charisma level, saying he’s a nice enough guy but the party might need a more dynamic leader who can come across well on television.

"Let’s face it. Reid is not the Democratic Tom Selleck," Washington political analyst Stuart Rothenberg said. [Source]

This from a party that went from Al Gore to John Kerry? I didn’t realize that charisma was any kind of requirement lately. Though after Tom Daschle who had the charisma of a wet wash rag hanging in the shower – Harry Reid has to be a gain in that direction.

The following is a part of the text of Governor McGreevey’s farewell speech.

I am not apologizing for being a gay American, but rather, for having let personal feelings impact my decision-making and for not having had the courage to be open about whom I was.

…You see, today I stand before you as a changed man. Aeschylus said, ‘In our sleep, pain which cannot forget falls drop by drop upon the heart until, in our own despair, against our will, comes wisdom through the awful grace of God.’ Like the psalmist of old, I have asked God to ‘create in me a clean heart’ and to ‘renew a right spirit within me.’ I stand before you as a man who has experienced the freedom that comes with the truth — claiming that promise, ‘the truth will set you free.’ Just as Lincoln said that house divided against itself cannot stand, so it is true with a person. A divided self is not an integrated self. And so as I have been preparing for this day I have been doing some mending in my soul. I so want the words of my mouth and the actions of my hands and the thoughts of my heart to be one and the same thing. That brings proper alignment, something true and whole.

…With these thoughts then, I begin my own new journey as an American who just happens to be gay and proud. I don’t look back with bitterness, anger or sorrow. I look forward to seeking knowledge, a journey of self-discovery and finding ways to contribute my gifts to those to whom they could be helpful. I won’t dwell on what might have been and instead have been focused on what’s possible. You see, as Kipling said, ‘… I have met with triumph and disaster’ … and as he hoped, I realize that those two impostors are just the same. So I will dare to dream, but this time, not let the dream by my master.

His speech was full of biblical references and references to his soul though of course one statement he attributed to Lincoln was originally said by Jesus. It is sad that his personal reassessment does not include a reevaluations of the trap of identifying yourself by a sexual attachment.

He came into the headlines before the scandal that caused him to resign broke out when The Most Rev. Joseph Galante said that McGreevey could not receive Communion because of his remarriage without annulment and the fact that he supports abortion, embryonic stem-cell research, and other issues. To his credit McGreevey said that he would not receive Communion, though he made statements critical of the Bishops calling his statement a "profound disservice to the faithful."