Early Reaction to Miers Negative

President Bush has done himself a disservice in nominating White House counsel Harriet Miers to replace Justice O'Connor.

Already the charge of cronyism has been raised, even by Nina Totenberg in her running NPR commentary.

I don't much about counsel Miers, but when there were so many outstanding candidates, this does smack of cronyism.

The comments at Confirm them overwhelming express anger and betrayal.

The comments at RedState are likewise negative, including this one:

For perhaps the first time since November 2000, I think we've witnessed George Bush "blink" when confronted by an important challenge.

I'll reserve judgement on the Miers nomination, but I am shocked and disappointed.

Betsy Newmark posted before the president's announcement that "this will be a big disappointment to many, many conservative supporters of the President. Compared to some of the names that have been mentioned, she is not of that caliber."

At Captain's Quarters, Captain Ed is also mystified posting that Miers does not look like the best candidate for the job.

Stop The ACLU is posts, "I think there could have been a better pick. I’m not thrilled, but will have to do more study."

At The Volokh Conspiracy, David Bernstein posts, "appointing his "personal lawyer" from Texas seems very Lyndon Johnsonish."

AT SCOTUSblog, Tom Goldstein posts the Miers nomination creates a very interesting political dynamic that places the nomination in peril.

At New England Republican, The Northeast Dilemma is also disappointed and posts "Dubya just proved to conservatives he is not interested in shifting the Court right."

At Powerline, John calls the nomination a dissapointment.

At Right Wing News, John Hawkins posts the noomination "is undoubtedly the worst decision of Bush's entire presidency so far."

At Wizbang, Mary Katharine Ham isn't thrilled.

Comments

[Debbie Hamilton]

Who is Harriet Miers and why did Bush appoint her? Bush hired Ms. Miers to vet himself to see if there was anything in his past that would hurt him politically when he or Rove began eyeing the White House. She reported that the rumors about his National Guard service might be a problem. We know that the “rumor” circled around Ben Barnes. Then, Bush appointed Ms. Miers to the Texas Lottery Commission. Nora Linares was the Director of the Texas Lottery Commission since its inception. Gtech is the company that runs the lottery game. Gtech had secretly hired Mike Moeller, who was a friend of Linares. Moeller was also a casualty of Rove’s “dirty trick” to smear Hightower (see Bush’s Brain) for his client current Governor Perry. Ms. Miers was instrumental in getting Linares removed. Ms. Meirs stated that the commission did not fire Linares because of the Moeller contract, but to move the commission forward. During the Linares controversy, it came to light that Ben Barnes was earning $3 million a year from Gtech for lobbying. When Barnes quit Gtech in 1997, he and his partner received a $23 million severance. Linares sued Gtech claiming that Gtech had given her bofriend a secret $30,000 consulting contract to have something to hold over her. Gtech settled paying $725,000 to Linares and her lawyers. The Texas Lottery Commission appointed Lawrence Littwin to replace Linares. He did not last long because he was looking to replace Gtech. Littwin also sued Gtech. He claimed that Gtech had undue influence over the Texas Lottery Commission to fire him. Littwin claimed that they had this influence because Ben Barnes, one of their lobbyists, had damaging information on Bush’s guard service. Gtech settled out of court for $300,000. Ms. Miers had an ethic problem of her own with the Texas Lottery Commission, but of course she didn’t get fired. Ms. Miers firm represented GSD&M the lottery’s advertising company, but she abstains from voting on advertising issues. Ms. Miers followed Bush to the White House and now is his pick to sit on the Supreme Court. Thus, she is a friend of Bush and is loyal. Remember what a good job Mike Brown did at FEMA? Many conservatives are upset because they are not sure what Ms. Miers views are on abortion. They feel Bush should have picked a true, known conservative. I have to laugh at the religious charlatans trying to ease their fears. One thing they offer the critics is that Ms. Miers worked to get the ABA to not come out for abortion rights. This is not true. Ms. Miers tried to get them to let members vote on the matter before coming out. Another ray of hope the charlatans try to give conservatives, is that Bush knows her and he would not appoint judges that did not agree with him. Bush has never said that he feels Roe v Wade should be overturned. While governor of Texas, Bush appointed moderates to the court who rulings “shocked” Joe Kral, the legislative director for the Texas Right to Life Committee. The charlatans hold up that Ms. Miers attends an evangelical church, so this proves she would be pro-life. Kerry attended the Catholic Church, which is pro-life, but he still felt that abortion should be legal. It is unseemly to have an appointee so close to the president who is appointing them. This has happened before with President Johnson and Abe Fortes. Fortes served on the court from 1965-1969. He didn’t die. He resigned because of a scandal. Richard Nixon appointed Harry Blackmun to replace Fortes. Blackmun went on to author Roe v Wade.