|
|
|
Jewish World Review Oct. 13, 2005 / 10 Tishrei, 5766 Stop Miers now! By Michael Graham
http://www.JewishWorldReview.com |
If George W. Bush were just a rich Texan and Harriet Miers was back in her Dallas law offices, do you know what she would do if he walked in off the street today and asker her to take a case involving constitutional legal issues?
She'd refer him to someone else. That's what a good lawyer does with cases she is not qualified to handle.
Unfortunately (for the Constitution), George W. Bush isn't just an oilman anymore. He's President of the United States. And Miss Miers isn't just an undistinguished, second-rate attorney. No, she's an undistinguished second-rate attorney who is a buddy of George W. Bush.
And so we face a future in which a woman who would never get hired to appear before the Supreme Court will soon be sitting on the Supreme Court. If you think I am being unfair to Harriet Miers, Esq., you should hear what her friends have to say about her.
Sen. Arlen Specter, who labeled conservatives like me a "lynch mob" (hey—didn't he steal that from Clarence Thomas?) says Miers' legal experience is so thin that "she needs a crash course in constitutional law."
Former Sen. Dan Coats, Miers' handler in the upcoming confirmation process, acknowledges that she is no "great intellectual powerhouse." However, he suggests that her mediocrity would prevent the court from being "so skewed on the intellectual side that we may not be getting representation of America as a whole."
First there was the "Jewish Seat" on the court. Then the "Black Seat," and the "Woman's Seat." Now, we've apparently added another one: The "Stupid Seat."
The worst thing anyone has said about Harriet Miers is that her life experience is so limited she thinks George W. Bush is the most brilliant man she's ever met.
Unfortunately, that remark was made by Harriet Miers.
For a week now, I've been calling Miers the worst court pick since Portland took Sam Bowie over Charles Barkley, John Stockton and Michael Jordan in the '84 NBA draft. I've been challenging her supporters—when I can find one—to give me a single reason to change my mind.
I am left to conclude that such a reason, fact or argument simply does not exist. Miers defenders make no arguments, only demands. They demand that I be mindlessly loyal to President Bush and back any choice he makes, no matter how badly he betrays his constituents and the Constitution.
When I do bully an affirmative answer out of a Miers' supporter, it is nearly always "because she's a Christian."
While I agree that nobody should be DIS-qualified from the SCOTUS because of his or her religion, Bible-thumping is not, in and of itself, a qualification for high public office. My mom is an evangelical Christian. I love her dearly. But if the president called her tomorrow and said "Pat, I'm puttin' you on the Supreme Court," my mom would politely reply: "George, have you started drinking again?"
The idea that a Judge Miers is going to vote the way Jesus would vote is preposterous on its face. Jesus Christ wouldn't be involved in a deliberative body in the first place. He's "all powerful, no appeals." Not even Antonin Scalia can overturn THAT precedent.
But evangelicals who look at Miers more practically will see for themselves why the Church Lady is a lousy choice for the court. G-d calls on us to do what is right. Being a judge means doing what is legal.
Just the other day, for example, the Supreme Court heard a case involving the state of Oregon allowing doctors to use prescription drugs to help sick people commit suicide. The Bush Administration argued that the federal government regulates these medicines and how they can be used, and the feds don't want the people of Oregon to use them to kill people. So the Bush administration asked the Court to overturn Oregon's state law.
According to Miers' supporters, her pro-life views would make her a solid vote against physician-assisted suicide and she would almost certainly smite down the laws of Oregon, yea verily.
Here's the problem: If it's unconstitutional for a state to regulate medical procedures like prescription drug use, then it's unconstitutional for states to regulate other medical practices, like abortion. And if medical decisions like what drugs your doctor can use are a federal issue, then certainly medical decisions like allowing abortion are federal, too.
Congratulations, Judge Jesus: You just upheld Roe vs. Wade!
The reason the Supreme Court should strike down Roe tomorrow isn't because abortion is wrong (it is) or because it's not God's will. Roe should be reversed because it is clearly unconstitutional. That's it. End of story.
Do we really want to appoint someone to the Supreme Court who needs a "crash course" to figure that out?
I have one last question that the Kool-Aid drinking wing of the GOP cannot answer: If Ruth Bader Ginsburg suddenly converted to Lutheranism but kept her current judicial philosophy, would that make her a judge you would want on the court? Of course not.
But if Harriet Miers announced tomorrow that she had converted to Kabbalah with Madonna and planned to adopt the philosophy of Jewish mysticism, would you still be on the Miers bandwagon?
I rest my case.
For more information on the Miers pick, check out www.stopmiersnow.com
Every weekday JewishWorldReview.com publishes what many in in the media and Washington consider "must-reading". Sign up for the daily JWR update. It's free. Just click here.
JWR contributor Michael Graham is a talk show host and author of the highly acclaimed "Redneck Nation: How the South Really Won the War." Listen to "Michael Graham, Unleashed" weekdays at www.rightalk.com. To comment, please click here.
© 2005, Michael Graham
|
Arnold Ahlert | |||||||||||
