[Speed Gibson,
Wednesday October 26, 2005 at 1:36am]
Hugh Hewitt and Miers
A guest on Hugh Hewitt put his finger on the true nature of the Miers debate. It is not pro and con, it is anti- and anti-anti-, the latter attacking the anti-'s rather than try to explain Bush's thinking and Miers qualifications.
Hugh Hewitt, God love him, is continuing his anti-anti- arguments. He has virtually nothing to say on why Bush picked her. After naming many Supreme Court caliber judges for the Court of Appeals, why does he now pick a District Court caliber non-judge for the Supreme Court? He argues profusely on Miers' resume, but basically demands that we prove the negative as to why that's not enough.
This in turn leads to a non-sequitur that failure to support the Miers nomination would be disastrous for the GOP. But what if her hearings prove disastrous, as several pundits fear? No, President George W. Bush got us in this mess, and he (or Miers) will have to get us out.
The Miers nomination isn't quite the Monty Python dead parrot yet, but there's almost no enthusiasm in sight.
Hugh Hewitt, God love him, is continuing his anti-anti- arguments. He has virtually nothing to say on why Bush picked her. After naming many Supreme Court caliber judges for the Court of Appeals, why does he now pick a District Court caliber non-judge for the Supreme Court? He argues profusely on Miers' resume, but basically demands that we prove the negative as to why that's not enough.
This in turn leads to a non-sequitur that failure to support the Miers nomination would be disastrous for the GOP. But what if her hearings prove disastrous, as several pundits fear? No, President George W. Bush got us in this mess, and he (or Miers) will have to get us out.
The Miers nomination isn't quite the Monty Python dead parrot yet, but there's almost no enthusiasm in sight.