Making Conservatives Cringe Since 1977

One of the posts here at Making Conservatives Cringe Since 1977 has prompted an interesting interchange between a couple of my patrons. Sample: I agree that Miers is NOT qualified for this position . . . Ike [Eisenhower] even commented in the years after he appointed Gov. Earl Warren of California to become Chief Justice, that Warren was "the biggest damn fool mistake he ever made." Today, before getting on the highest bench, a justice needs to have proved him/herself as being capable on a lower ranking bench. By the way, since harping on lack of judicial experience is ok, what about her legal career and tell us what are the qualifications for being on the Supreme Court. True that there are no other "constitutional" qualifications for serving on the nation's highest court other than 1) being nominated by the President and 2) being confirmed by the Senate . . . Being a lawyer does give a back ground in legal knowledge and shows that you can argue a point...but it does NOT show that you can fairly adjudicate, in light of the Constitution, a legal dispute. She's more than qualified and I think she'll be great . . .trust me. She has legal experience beyond experience. You don't run the bar of one of the largest states in the Nation and not have enough legal experience to decide cases on the Supreme Court. (My favorite) This is too funny. We have two conservative bloggers on a liberal site arguing with each other over a conservative judicial nominee. I was thinking about all this quite intently as I found myself on another 2 hour ride out to State Headquarters yesterday. I'’ve mentioned before the sensitive nature of my job and have come to the conclusion I shouldn'’t elaborate to much after reviewing some of the policies on blogging in the military (thanks again Pebble Pie), although I really wish I could share my perspective from inside Homeland Security world. Lets just say the National Guard has been busy as of late. On the ride we pulled over at one of New York's fine rest stops on the Thruway. There I purchased the October 13, 2005 edition of The New York Times. It cost a freaking dollar, but USA Today just wasn't going to cut it. Low and behold I stumbled across an article by Linda Greenhouse that combined the themes that I'd been pondering: Justices Grapple With Whether Public Employees Enjoy Free-Speech Rights on the Job

WASHINGTON, Oct. 12 - The free-speech rights of public employees proved a thorny and elusive subject for the Supreme Court in an argument on Wednesday.

The question was whether the Constitution protects government workers from retaliation for what they say on the job or in the course of their routine duties. A deputy district attorney in Los Angeles who claimed he had been demoted for challenging the legitimacy of a search warrant was found by a federal appeals court to be entitled to a trial on whether the demotion violated the First Amendment.

In trying to put myself in someone from the other end of the political spectrum's shoes, I've come to some conclusions. I wouldn't be worried about Miers toeing the party line if she ascends to the bench. I think everything about her say "Conservative," and "Team Player." Between Roberts, Thomas, and Old Scalloped Potatoes, they should be able to get the results with Miers that they want. On the other hand I would be worried that the strength of her written opinions could cause whatever significant decisions that go in favor of the Conservative agenda to be overturned in the future. Then again maybe Confederate Yankee's Rovelogic is the truth that lies beneath all of this.

Speaking of Confederate Yankee, you may have noticed that my Link section, "The Darkside," has been reincarnated. I know some on the left decline to link to the right, but sometimes I need the comic relief that can only be supplied by the absurd, strained logic, all to often on display at these blogs. Once in a while, however, I find a gem of an actual discussion which makes all the time I waste perusing the pulp pay off. Liberty Just in Case is a prime example of this. One of the other links there, The Political Teen, shows a video highlighting the game of chicken that Conservatives are playing with their political power. The Rightwing News asks the very real question of "Is 2006 Going To Be The Democrat's 1994?"

The objective truth of this whole situation is that Harriet Miers is qualified in every aspect except when it comes to the ethics involved with her selection and her relationship with the President. The conflict between Conservatives over this nomination is like a slow motion train wreck that you just can't look away from. It could indeed give the Democrats an advantage in 2006. It could also give Progressives, and Independents from all ends of the spectrum an opportunity as well.

Who ever it is better take a listen to this song. Then fix shit.