Harriet Miers

scaeagles · 10-03-2005, 09:19 AM

She is a bit on the scary side.

I am concerned about this selection, and have some difficulty understanding it.

First of all, if everyone thought there was little to no paper trail for Roberts and therefore he could not be judged properly in committee or the Senate, just wait until she gets to the hearings. AS legal counsel to the President, is it priviledged? Or is she legal counsel to the office, making her accountable to the people, not Bush as an individual? I seem to recall some case related to this during the Clinton administration, but don't recall.

I would suppose her legal history in Texas may shed some light on her, but considering she contributed to Clinton/Gore, I would suspect she has had some changes in her outlook since she is one of - if not the most - inner of Bushes inner circle of advisors.

So this brings me to my concern. I don't have much in common with Harry Reid (senate minority leader), so I wonder why he asked the President to consider her. I would figure that Bush must know her very well, but why nominate someone with no judicial experience whatsoever? Two different options come to my mind.

One, Bush wants no big fight. Why? I doubt if it is polling numbers. Has he lost political resolve?

Second, as he knows and trusts her very well, obviously, does he believe she shares his Constitutional philosophy?

I will be interested to learn more about her.

10-03-2005, 09:19 AM	#1
scaeagles I LIKE! Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 7,819	She is a bit on the scary side. I am concerned about this selection, and have some difficulty understanding it. First of all, if everyone thought there was little to no paper trail for Roberts and therefore he could not be judged properly in committee or the Senate, just wait until she gets to the hearings. AS legal counsel to the President, is it priviledged? Or is she legal counsel to the office, making her accountable to the people, not Bush as an individual? I seem to recall some case related to this during the Clinton administration, but don't recall. I would suppose her legal history in Texas may shed some light on her, but considering she contributed to Clinton/Gore, I would suspect she has had some changes in her outlook since she is one of - if not the most - inner of Bushes inner circle of advisors. So this brings me to my concern. I don't have much in common with Harry Reid (senate minority leader), so I wonder why he asked the President to consider her. I would figure that Bush must know her very well, but why nominate someone with no judicial experience whatsoever? Two different options come to my mind. One, Bush wants no big fight. Why? I doubt if it is polling numbers. Has he lost political resolve? Second, as he knows and trusts her very well, obviously, does he believe she shares his Constitutional philosophy? I will be interested to learn more about her.
	Submit to Quotes