Michael Gaynor
Pat Buchanan v. Rachel Alexander on Harriet Miers
By Michael Gaynor
In 2000, Pat Buchanan was edged out for President by George W. Bush. His presence in the race was a potential disaster for conservatives who realized that a Gore presidency needed to be avoided. Fortunately, Ralph Nader blunted the Buchanan effect by drawing votes from the idealistic left, balancing the Buchanan votes from the idealisti right.
Of course, the Constitution entrusts the right and responsibility to nominate all federal judges to the President. That's George W. Bush, not Mr. Buchanan, of course. But Mr. Buchanan vigorously opposed the nomination of Harriet Miers, just like he vigorously opposed President Bush in 2000, because they are not quite conservative enough for him. Principled, to be sure. Practical, no. Dangerous? Yes.
With the Miers withdrawal now history, Mr. Buchanan has a good word for Ms. Miers and more emphatic advice for President Bush:
"By withdrawing her nomination, Harriet Miers spared herself an agonizing inquisition and probable rejection by the Senate and did George W. Bush the greatest service of her career. She may just have helped him save his presidency.
"Like a school marm indulging a teacher's pet, Miss Miers just gave George Bush permission to retake the final exam he booted badly. She has given him a second chance to succeed where Nixon, Ford, Reagan and his father all failed: to become the president who rang down the curtain on 50 years of judicial tyranny and reshaped the Supreme Court into the great constitutionalist body the Founding Fathers intended.
"George Bush is a lucky man to have a friend like Harriet Miers.
"Had her nomination been pursued through the judiciary committee to the full Senate, it would have meant civil war inside the party. President Bush would have been forced to watch congressional members of his party and conservatives publicly call for rejection and defeat of the woman who had given him a decade of devoted service.
"The fallout from this fratricidal war could have lasted for years. By standing down, Miers called off the family fight about to erupt inside the president's own household.
"Nothing better befits Harriet Miers' nomination than the style and grace of her leaving it."
Or, just as President Nixon's nomination of the qualified but rejected Judge Clement Haynsworth was followed by his nomination of the flawed and rejected Judge G. Harold Carswell and finally the nomination and confirmation of a Supreme judicial activist and the author of Roe v. Wade, Harry Blackmun, things can get enormously worse.
It is regrettable that 2000 Americans died to free and offer the opportunity for democracy to Iraq. And, of course, to keep the War on Terror away from America's shores. But war inevitably has a cost in both blood and treasure and 2000 is .00004 of 45,000,000, the approximate number of unborn babies aborted in America since a constitutional right to abortion was fabricated by a Supreme majority led by Justice Blackmun.
Mr. Buchanan insisted that Ms. Miers was not conservative enough, for himself or any conservative Senator, and humorously (but emphatically) warned President Bush hereafter to toe the Buchanan line, lest he not be considered reasonably intelligent:
"Given Miers' absence of a judicial record or a deeply embedded philosophy of judicial restraint, her expressed sympathy for jurists who order legislators to act, and her sympathy for feminist causes and affirmative action, it is hard to see how a conservative senator could vote to make her the decisive voice on the Supreme Court for the next generation.
"If they voted her down, they would split the party and enrage the president. If they voted her onto the court, they would betray the voters to whom they had pledged to support only strict constructionists and constitutionalists of proven merit and ability.
"It was lose-lose. The president, his party and the right were all marching grimly toward First Manassas, when Sister Harriet saved us all.
"Sens. Kennedy, Leahy and Boxer are urging President Bush to 'show strength,' by appointing a moderate. But, if I am not mistaken, didn't Bush just do that? And how did the nominee that made Harry Reid a happy man turn out?
"President Bush just survived a barrel ride over Niagara Falls. A man of reasonable intelligence would not risk it a second time."
I seem to recall Democrats challenging President Bush's intelligence. He won the Presidency twice, nonetheless. And it turned out that both his IQ and grade point average at Yale were higher than the candidate of the leftist intelligencia, Senator John Kerry, who is intelligent enough to marry incredibly wealthy women but apparently not intelligent enough to appreciate that a Catholic politician cannot be a faithful Catholic and support a civil right to abortion.
Gilding the lily, Mr. Buchanan suggested that those who opposed the Miers nomination are instruments of God, specified his requirements for the President's next Supreme Court nominee, and celebrated in a manner reminiscent of an FDR (or Al Smith) enthusiast:
"With the nominations of John Roberts and Bernard Bernacke, Bush appointed men of experience and proven capacity who share his beliefs. Given this heaven-sent second chance, he should do the same with the Supreme Court: Pick a justice whose credentials are unimpeachable and whose judicial philosophy reads likes an excerpt from The Collected Works of Antonin Scalia.
"With a single stroke — the nomination of a Supreme Court justice who will remove the smile from the countenance of Chuck Schumer and unite his unhappy household in praise of Bush and anticipation of battle, as they pull down the rusty old pike-staffs from the wall — President Bush can begin the resurrection of his presidency.
"In the title of the old Gospel Song, 'Oh Happy Day.'"
Rachel Alexander knows better!
She too wants a strict constructionist and a conservative to replace Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, who grew less strict and less conservative with age.
But Ms. Alexander appreciates not only that Ms. Miers is a strict construction and a conservative, but also that elections are not won just by pleasing a small fraction of the potential voters and antagonizing a bigger fraction.
So Ms. Alexander entitled her story on the Miers withdrawal "Conservatives eat one of their own" instead of "Oh Happy Day!":
"Miers has withdrawn. The naysayers on the right can be proud, they forced this intelligent conservative woman off the Supreme Court. It's really unfortunate that conservatives would devote this much of their time and resources toward taking down one of their own, instead of tackling an issue on the left. As I pointed out in a prior blog post, they would rather confirm liberal Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg with 96 votes than devote efforts to blocking her.
"Here are just a few of the brilliant decisions by Ginsburg:
"And during Ginsburg's confirmation hearings? She did not answer many questions involving abortion, gay rights, separation of church and state, rights of the disabled, and more. In fact, during a September 28, 2005 speech at Wake Forest University Ginsburg said that refusing to answer questions on some cases was 'unquestionably right.'
"It's really quite unfortunate. The left wasn't even opposing Miers, which was the best possible position. Since they weren't opposing her, there was little pressure on conservative Senators to withdraw their support. And since they weren't supporting her either, the right could feel assured that Miers was not a stealth liberal.
":I guess Bush needs to nominate a liberal Ivy League graduate like Ginsburg with a long history of leftist 'living constitution' and 'internationalism' constitutional interpretation. That would pacify the right — only 4 Senators guaranteed to defect!"
The bad news is that Ms. Alexander is right and Mr. Buchanan is wrong: the notion that conservatives can vote to confirm the ACLU's Justice Ginsburg but cannot vote to confirm Ms. Miers is noxious.
The good news is that Ms. Alexander is much, much younger than Mr. Buchanan.
And the unstated question lurking in the minds of a politically important number of Miers supporters is whether Ms. Miers would have been a Supreme if she had been born in the Northeast instead of Texas, to Jewish parents instead of Catholics, chosen to study and work in her home state instead of to leave it, and not converted as a mature adult to evangelical Christianity.
Yes, Mr. President. Judge Edith Jones next. PLEASE!
© Michael Gaynor
In 2000, Pat Buchanan was edged out for President by George W. Bush. His presence in the race was a potential disaster for conservatives who realized that a Gore presidency needed to be avoided. Fortunately, Ralph Nader blunted the Buchanan effect by drawing votes from the idealistic left, balancing the Buchanan votes from the idealisti right.
Of course, the Constitution entrusts the right and responsibility to nominate all federal judges to the President. That's George W. Bush, not Mr. Buchanan, of course. But Mr. Buchanan vigorously opposed the nomination of Harriet Miers, just like he vigorously opposed President Bush in 2000, because they are not quite conservative enough for him. Principled, to be sure. Practical, no. Dangerous? Yes.
With the Miers withdrawal now history, Mr. Buchanan has a good word for Ms. Miers and more emphatic advice for President Bush:
"By withdrawing her nomination, Harriet Miers spared herself an agonizing inquisition and probable rejection by the Senate and did George W. Bush the greatest service of her career. She may just have helped him save his presidency.
"Like a school marm indulging a teacher's pet, Miss Miers just gave George Bush permission to retake the final exam he booted badly. She has given him a second chance to succeed where Nixon, Ford, Reagan and his father all failed: to become the president who rang down the curtain on 50 years of judicial tyranny and reshaped the Supreme Court into the great constitutionalist body the Founding Fathers intended.
"George Bush is a lucky man to have a friend like Harriet Miers.
"Had her nomination been pursued through the judiciary committee to the full Senate, it would have meant civil war inside the party. President Bush would have been forced to watch congressional members of his party and conservatives publicly call for rejection and defeat of the woman who had given him a decade of devoted service.
"The fallout from this fratricidal war could have lasted for years. By standing down, Miers called off the family fight about to erupt inside the president's own household.
"Nothing better befits Harriet Miers' nomination than the style and grace of her leaving it."
Or, just as President Nixon's nomination of the qualified but rejected Judge Clement Haynsworth was followed by his nomination of the flawed and rejected Judge G. Harold Carswell and finally the nomination and confirmation of a Supreme judicial activist and the author of Roe v. Wade, Harry Blackmun, things can get enormously worse.
It is regrettable that 2000 Americans died to free and offer the opportunity for democracy to Iraq. And, of course, to keep the War on Terror away from America's shores. But war inevitably has a cost in both blood and treasure and 2000 is .00004 of 45,000,000, the approximate number of unborn babies aborted in America since a constitutional right to abortion was fabricated by a Supreme majority led by Justice Blackmun.
Mr. Buchanan insisted that Ms. Miers was not conservative enough, for himself or any conservative Senator, and humorously (but emphatically) warned President Bush hereafter to toe the Buchanan line, lest he not be considered reasonably intelligent:
"Given Miers' absence of a judicial record or a deeply embedded philosophy of judicial restraint, her expressed sympathy for jurists who order legislators to act, and her sympathy for feminist causes and affirmative action, it is hard to see how a conservative senator could vote to make her the decisive voice on the Supreme Court for the next generation.
"If they voted her down, they would split the party and enrage the president. If they voted her onto the court, they would betray the voters to whom they had pledged to support only strict constructionists and constitutionalists of proven merit and ability.
"It was lose-lose. The president, his party and the right were all marching grimly toward First Manassas, when Sister Harriet saved us all.
"Sens. Kennedy, Leahy and Boxer are urging President Bush to 'show strength,' by appointing a moderate. But, if I am not mistaken, didn't Bush just do that? And how did the nominee that made Harry Reid a happy man turn out?
"President Bush just survived a barrel ride over Niagara Falls. A man of reasonable intelligence would not risk it a second time."
I seem to recall Democrats challenging President Bush's intelligence. He won the Presidency twice, nonetheless. And it turned out that both his IQ and grade point average at Yale were higher than the candidate of the leftist intelligencia, Senator John Kerry, who is intelligent enough to marry incredibly wealthy women but apparently not intelligent enough to appreciate that a Catholic politician cannot be a faithful Catholic and support a civil right to abortion.
Gilding the lily, Mr. Buchanan suggested that those who opposed the Miers nomination are instruments of God, specified his requirements for the President's next Supreme Court nominee, and celebrated in a manner reminiscent of an FDR (or Al Smith) enthusiast:
"With the nominations of John Roberts and Bernard Bernacke, Bush appointed men of experience and proven capacity who share his beliefs. Given this heaven-sent second chance, he should do the same with the Supreme Court: Pick a justice whose credentials are unimpeachable and whose judicial philosophy reads likes an excerpt from The Collected Works of Antonin Scalia.
"With a single stroke — the nomination of a Supreme Court justice who will remove the smile from the countenance of Chuck Schumer and unite his unhappy household in praise of Bush and anticipation of battle, as they pull down the rusty old pike-staffs from the wall — President Bush can begin the resurrection of his presidency.
"In the title of the old Gospel Song, 'Oh Happy Day.'"
Rachel Alexander knows better!
She too wants a strict constructionist and a conservative to replace Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, who grew less strict and less conservative with age.
But Ms. Alexander appreciates not only that Ms. Miers is a strict construction and a conservative, but also that elections are not won just by pleasing a small fraction of the potential voters and antagonizing a bigger fraction.
So Ms. Alexander entitled her story on the Miers withdrawal "Conservatives eat one of their own" instead of "Oh Happy Day!":
"Miers has withdrawn. The naysayers on the right can be proud, they forced this intelligent conservative woman off the Supreme Court. It's really unfortunate that conservatives would devote this much of their time and resources toward taking down one of their own, instead of tackling an issue on the left. As I pointed out in a prior blog post, they would rather confirm liberal Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg with 96 votes than devote efforts to blocking her.
"Here are just a few of the brilliant decisions by Ginsburg:
- Wrote a dissenting opinion in Bush v. Gore
- Wrote the majority opinion in U.S. v. Virginia striking down the Virginia Military Institute's longtime policy status as a male-only school.
- Relied on international law to agree with the majority decision in Roper v. Simmons that our Constitution's prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment clause should be interpreted to prohibit anyone under age 18 from being executed
"And during Ginsburg's confirmation hearings? She did not answer many questions involving abortion, gay rights, separation of church and state, rights of the disabled, and more. In fact, during a September 28, 2005 speech at Wake Forest University Ginsburg said that refusing to answer questions on some cases was 'unquestionably right.'
"It's really quite unfortunate. The left wasn't even opposing Miers, which was the best possible position. Since they weren't opposing her, there was little pressure on conservative Senators to withdraw their support. And since they weren't supporting her either, the right could feel assured that Miers was not a stealth liberal.
":I guess Bush needs to nominate a liberal Ivy League graduate like Ginsburg with a long history of leftist 'living constitution' and 'internationalism' constitutional interpretation. That would pacify the right — only 4 Senators guaranteed to defect!"
The bad news is that Ms. Alexander is right and Mr. Buchanan is wrong: the notion that conservatives can vote to confirm the ACLU's Justice Ginsburg but cannot vote to confirm Ms. Miers is noxious.
The good news is that Ms. Alexander is much, much younger than Mr. Buchanan.
And the unstated question lurking in the minds of a politically important number of Miers supporters is whether Ms. Miers would have been a Supreme if she had been born in the Northeast instead of Texas, to Jewish parents instead of Catholics, chosen to study and work in her home state instead of to leave it, and not converted as a mature adult to evangelical Christianity.
Yes, Mr. President. Judge Edith Jones next. PLEASE!
© Michael Gaynor
The views expressed by RenewAmerica columnists are their own and do not necessarily reflect the position of RenewAmerica or its affiliates.
(See RenewAmerica's publishing standards.)
