October 13, 2005


Somebody should take Peggy Noonan's column today and staple copies of it to the forehead of every single person in the White House.

Regardless of what you might have thought of Harriet Miers to begin with, Dubya and his people have made a pig's breakfast of presenting her case the past week and a half. It's time to admit the error, climb down and start over.

UPDATE: Fred Barnes, on the other hand, puts some of the blame on the Conservative Rebels (now there's an expression you don't often hear) for shooting first and asking questions later. He urges that everybody wait for the confirmation hearings.

UPDATE DEUX: John Fund has a rather appalling article about how the White House got into this mess to begin with.

Posted by Robert at October 13, 2005 08:20 AM | TrackBack

I'd recommend David Brooks' column in this morning's NYT, where he offers some snippets from "President's Opinion," the column Miers wrote when she was president of the Texas Bar Association. Here's a sample:

"There is always a necessity to tend to a myriad of responsibilities on a number of cases as well as matters not directly related to the practice of law." And yet, "Disciplining ourselves to provide the opportunity for thought and analysis has to rise again to a high priority."

I picked that at random from Brooks' selections. Sounds just like Scalia or Thomas, doesn't it?

Posted by: utron at October 13, 2005 12:25 PM

Actually, sounds like what any lawyer would say.

Er, or were you being sarcastic?

Posted by: Robbo the LB at October 13, 2005 12:37 PM

Robbo, my point (shamelessly lifted from Brooks) was that Miers tends to write in vapid abstractions. Scalia and Thomas both write clearly and incisively, in different ways. My sarcasm flopped because I don't write all that well; luckily, nobody wants to see me on the Supreme Court.

Posted by: utron at October 13, 2005 12:56 PM

Me neither, praise God.

'Course, to be fair to Miers on this quote, this is exactly the sort of fluff I always see in Bar Association magazines, perhaps because it can be knocked off in about five minutes. I would hope that her, shall we say, varsity efforts would be a bit more weighty and concise.

But then again, there's no way to tell, is there?

Posted by: Robbo the LB at October 13, 2005 01:09 PM

I find it amusing that conservatives are shocked, shocked I say, that the WH would attack the critics instead of the message. This has been a fundamental tactic since day one. Isn’t this the exact reason half of the WH is currently under investigation by that partisan hack Fitzgerald?

Posted by: LB buddy at October 13, 2005 05:47 PM