View the trailer
Advertisement

The Hugh Hewitt Show

Listen 24/7 Live: Mon - Fri   6 - 9 AM Eastern
Hugh Hewitt Book ClubHugh Hewitt Book Club
European Voyage Cruise 2017 Advertisement

Two Contests

Tuesday, October 25, 2005  |  posted by Hugh Hewitt
Advertisement

First, a Crosley radio to the first person to send me a link to the June 24, 1992 Texas Bar Association Resolution that anti-Miers commentators are citing as evidence of her unreliability on Bollinger v. Grutter and related issues.

I have reviewed the Miers essay for the October 1992 issue of the Texas Bar Journal, “Inclusion, Education and Monitoring,” and there is nothing that is objectionable in the piece and much that is in fact quite admirable.

The hiring policies urged by the Texas Bar on private law firms may turn out to be quite objectionable, but they are not referenced in this essay, and the Washington Post article on the subject is not detailed enough for me to reach any conclusion. I am following a “trust but verify” approach to such allegations.

Jonah Goldberg, among others, bought the Washington Post line in full, writing about this article this way:

THIS IS WHERE I GET OFF [Jonah Goldberg ]

My official position on Miers has been to criticize the selection, but give her the benefit of the doubt until the hearings. In other words, bad pick but she’s the nominee so let’s give her a shot.

No more.

After reading this story I’m officially against Miers. I’m with the Editors , Will, Frum, and Krauthammer.

It’s not just that Miers was in favor of racial quotas — we’d pretty much known that for a while. It’s the fundamental confirmation that she’s a go-along-with-the-crowd establishmentarian. The White House says that her enthusiastic support for goals, timetables and quotas at the Bar Association says nothing about her views on government race policies. Yeah, right. She simultaneously thought what she was doing was great and important while also believing it would be unconstitutional if the government did the same thing.

The White House says she’s an unchanging rock of principle. Uh huh. So have her opinions held constant since the early 1990s? Or have they shifted with the wind? If she’s a rock, I don’t want her. If she’s a weather vane, I don’t want her.

I just don’t want her.

Start over.

Second, a Crosley radio and a blog of the month selection to the blogger who finds from among the postings/writings of a high profile critic of the Miers nomination demanding withdrawal of the nomination, a past quote praising the president for his refusal to bend to withering poitical criticism. Perhaps there are no such quotes, but I think that many voices on the right have in the past praised Bush’s resoluteness on other matters.

Advertise With UsAdvertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Sierra Pacific Mortgage Advertisement
Hear what Hugh has to say about
Health Markets
Advertisement
Advertisement
Back to Top