Skip to main content

View Diary: On Miers (168 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  I find it hard believe that this is really (none)
    your beef with her? If she were a progressive would you take this position? Thurgood Marshall was considered "light" on the judicial philosophy and the checklist that some people have and yet I consider him to have been a good justice. Look, I am not saying this will be a good nominee- in fact i agree with Armando about the narrative. My problem is that the narrative being "she's not qualified" seems disingenous at least historically speaking. Of course, with the American people history don't matter so it probably could be a sucessful argument.
    •  I'd use it (none)
      As it helps open the important doors.

      The SCOTUS is Extraordinary.

      by Armando on Mon Oct 03, 2005 at 10:49:30 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  The reason "she's not qualified" (none)
      works is because bush is on record blowing it big time with unqualified people. We've seen the results with FEMA and that will resonate with the American people. You've seen what having a unqualified friend of bush as head of FEMA; think it'll be a good thing for the supreme court of the land???
    •  What (none)
      WHAT????

      I'm not the biggest fan of Thurgood Marshall as a Supreme, but for God's sake the guy was one of the luminaries of the Civil Rights movement!  He wrote over 150 decisions as an Appeals judges!  He argued 19 cases before the Supreme Court!

      Miers, on the other hand, appears to be...well, one of the lesser lights of Dallas city politics.

    •  What? (none)
      Thurgood Marshall was a successful advocate before the Supreme Court and an appellate judge. He had loads of experience on constitutional issues. Granted, he did not go to one of the top law schools, but given the state of race relations at that time, that's one I have to give him a pass on.

      Harriet Miers, in contrast, went to a second rate law school, did not make law review, did not get an appellate clerkship, and never argued before the Supreme Court. What on earth makes her qualified to suddenly become one of the nine people who decide what the Constitution means?

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site