Bell Curve The Law Talking Guy Raised by Republicans U.S. West
Well, he's kind of had it in for me ever since I accidentally ran over his dog. Actually, replace "accidentally" with "repeatedly," and replace "dog" with "son."

Wednesday, October 19, 2005

What a Judge Should Sound Like

Hi All,

Today's News Hour on PBS had a story on Arlen Specter's continuing frustration with both Meiers herself, her critics in the Religious Right and her supporters in the White House. Apparently, Meiers has annoyed just about the entire Senate Judiciary Committee with her contradictory, incomplete and "insulting" answers to a questionnaire they sent her to prepare for the confirmation hearings.

In contrast they also had an interview with current Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer. I disagree with some of his rulings and I found his split ruling on religious monuments on government property to be absurdly contradictory. However, his explanation of his position was at least thoughtful and eloquent. One thing it wasn't was "incomplete" or "insulting." I really have to ask if Meiers is really qualified to be a judge. We are at the point where we may need to ask, is the country better off with an obvious incompetent on the Court or with a raving ideologue? I suspect the US Supreme Court has survived both in greater number than we'd like to admit.

Still, I'd like to hear what you all think about it.

9 comments:

Anonymous said...

Well, RBR and I have talked about this. NPR reported this morning that our "pioneering" woman, who was the first ever to serve as Chair of the Texas State Bar, can't remember what year she held that position. Apparently, she can't remember what year she held most of her "important" positions. Apparently, she her right to practice law was suspended recently because she failed to pay her dues to the Washington DC Bar Association. Now call me crazy, but are you supposed to be serving as a White House Council when you are a bar member? Talk about a total flake.

I am left to wonder what Bush is up to. Miers doesn't fill out the questionnaire properly, but includes information about her stark views on abortion. Why on earth would you do that when you went to such efforts to hide the abortion views of the last nominee? Why would you choose someone with such easily attackable issues who is demonstrating such a caviler attitude toward the Committee? Someone who really wants a job doesn't behave like that. Perhaps Bush doesn't really want Miers to win the nomination. He chooses her 1) because she is a woman, so he can say he tried. 2) She can placate the far right, and he can say he tried. 3) She won't stand a chance at getting nominated and (this is RBR's part in our plot), suddenly Gonzales looks real good.
 

// posted by USWest

Anonymous said...

Eh.

It's not really Bush's MO, is it? "I tried, and I failed. Oh well. Here's someone else." 

// posted by Bell Curve

Anonymous said...

Yeah see that's the thing. We have to figure out if Bush is being some sort of really clever sneaky guy or is he just being an idiot.  

// posted by Raised By Republicans

Anonymous said...

I have to make a correction to my earlier post. It was Mier's Texas law license that had been suspended from Sept. 1-26, 1989, for late payment of bar dues. It wasn't her DC bar dues as I said in my post. 

// posted by USWest

US West said...

OK, I retract my retraction. This is a prime example of misinformation. NPR said that she lasped on her DC dues and had her licence revoked. The NYT said she that her Texas licence was suspended between Sept 1-26 1989 for failure to pay her Texas dues. I looked at her actual questionaire and it said, "Earlier this year[2005], I received notice that my dues for the District of Columbia Bar were delinquent and as a result[sic.,] my ability to practice law in D.C. had been suspended. I immediately sent the dues in to remedy the delinquency. The non-payment was not intentioned, and I corrected the situation upon receiving the letter." NPR wins. Go pledge!

Anonymous said...

" District of Columbia Bar were delinquent and as a result[sic.,] my ability to practice law in D.C. had been suspended." So how can she be White House Counsel?

Maybe this is why Bush wants her on the Supreme Court. She's about to lose her job. 

// posted by Raised By Republicans

Anonymous said...

What is interesting to me is the NYT report that puts her delinquent in 1989. I couldn't find that information in her questionnaire. I haven't had any success in searching it out on the web either. I haven't seen it reported anywhere else. Is it possible she has made the same mistake twice? Would the NYT fact checkers have been that far off? Does anyone out there have any insight?

Now supposing the NYT can be trusted, they published another fun fact: The year Meirs served as President of the Texas Bar (circa 1992) she supported an affirmative action type program that would guarantee female and minority seats on the Board of Directors of the Bar. One of the first people to benefit from this type of appointment to the board was none other than the current Attorney General, Alberto Gonzalas. See http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/23/politics/politicsspecial1/23miers.html
 

// posted by USWest

TheDevilIsInTheDetails said...

Another reason for abortion Resource... LifeLaw.org . A discussion forum for all that deals with such hot-button issues as reason for abortion .

Anonymous said...

Hi - I was searching for blogs about associations and found yours. Reason I was searching for associations is I have one and I'm looking for ways people run theirs.