Strange Fellows Bedding Down
How will conservative critics of the Miers nomination react to the fact that MoveOn.org now seems to be coming out against her for some of the very same reasons that they've articulated? From an e-mail sent yesterday:
Two days ago, President Bush nominated his personal lawyer and long-time friend Harriet Miers to Sandra Day O'Connor's crucial swing seat on the Supreme Court. With no judicial experience and an extremely thin public record, even leading right-wing pundits are calling her "transparently a crony" with "non-existent" qualifications.
Immediately after Miers' nomination, MoveOn members stepped up to try to fill the information void. In the last 48- hours we've collected nearly 5,000 facts about Harriet Miers' record? and we're working to get this information into the hands of the media and our partner organizations. But it's remarkable how, even after collecting nearly everything that's publicly available, Miers' position on major constitutional questions and her qualifications to be a judge are still almost completely unknown.
(Cue sinister background music)
What is clear is the deep personal and professional connection shared by Harriet Miers and George W. Bush.
Later in the e-mail, they even cite George Will, Pat Buchanan, and Michelle Malkin as sources.
I have to say that I'm getting sick of all this talk of "cronyism." Sure Miers is a woman in her sixties, but is it really necessary to use such a harsh label? A little civility here people.
No comments:
Post a Comment