Comments on: Miers Nomination Withdrawn

By: LegalThoughts

LegalThoughts — Thu, 27 Oct 2005 14:22:55 +0000

We’ll see just how “wild” the conspiracy theory advanced by Stella and others is when the President announces his next candidate. If it turns out to be Luttig or any of the others for whom the base has been clamoring all along, those theories wouldn’t seem so wild after all.

By: boonelsj

boonelsj — Thu, 27 Oct 2005 14:15:25 +0000

I think they “misunderestimated” the expectations of a large portion of their base, and thought that the usual winks and nods about her “true” views would be enough.

By: Jeremy Pierce

Jeremy Pierce — Thu, 27 Oct 2005 14:09:05 +0000

Even if he asked her to resign, it doesn’t seem fair to me to put ‘reluctantly’ in scare quotes. After all, even if he’s behind the resignation, it was a reluctant withdrawal. He originally didn’t want it to come to this point, and it’s reluctant even if he insisted on it. This is, of course, barring wild conspiracy theories such as the one in the previous comment, but that seems really unlikely. He had every indication that evangelicals would rally around her. He was totally blindsided by the immediate and irrational opposition to her that became gradually more rational as more information came about, but no one could have predicted how angry people could have gotten while there was still basically no evidence to support such anger.

ML responds: They weren’t intended as scare quotes: I meant them only to indicate a direct quotation, added before I had posted the full text of the President’s statement. Now that I’ve posted the statement, it of course speaks for itself, and therefore I’ve deleted the adverb altogether. Sorry for any misunderstanding.

By: Aire Libre

Aire Libre — Thu, 27 Oct 2005 14:00:28 +0000

Stella wonders whether the Meirs nomination possibly a decoy for someone more appealing for the evangelical base to rally around just in time for midterm elections. To the contrary, I think the Republican party elite’s slip is showing. They verbally pitched a Wall Street friendly nominee but the fundamentalist extremist clothing did not fit properly. The Republican party leadership only talks the talk to get the votes. Its real agenda is (and has been since Reagan) to support the Fortune 500 class.

By: Stella

Stella — Thu, 27 Oct 2005 13:37:31 +0000

Was the Meirs nomination possibly a decoy for someone more appealing for the evangelical base to rally around just in time for midterm elections, or did Bush drop the ball that badly? It seems the Bush administration is far far too clever to make such a blunder.

-Stella