10/05/2005

ugh

so it's supposedly fall and we've got another supreme court nominee who thinks 'secrecy' is how you demonstrate you are fit to serve on the court.

harriet miers. aunt harriet from bewitched?

i have some e-mails from tess, alan and boyd, among others, and i'll tell you to check the common ills tonight for more on your questions.

but here's my thing. she strikes me as a prude. i'm not seeing how a prude is going to help me by being on the court. i see how she'll help corporations. i see how she'll help bully boy.
if she makes the court and he's charged with anything, will she have to excuse herself?

Bush Defends Pick of Harriet Miers
In Washington, President Bush held a daytime press conference on Monday and spent most of the time defending his selection of Harriet Miers as his nominee to the Supreme Court. The selection of Miers has been widely criticized by conservatives because so little is known about her personal politics. She has never served as a judge. Miers Is "On The Extreme End of the Anti-Choice Movement" Later in the press conference, President Bush said he did not recall ever sitting down with Miers to discuss her view on abortion. But a former colleague of Miers' says her stance on abortion is clear. Lorlee Bartos - who ran Miers 1989 campaign for Dallas City Council - said "She is on the extreme end of the anti-choice movement. I think Harriet's belief was pretty strongly felt. I suspect she is of the same cloth as the president."

that's from democracy now (and if you aren't watching or listening, read elaine's thing about how important the show is).

the woman who ran her campaign says of miers 'she is on the extreme end of the anti-choice movement.' that's the woman c.i. was talking about this morning when critiquing the new york times coverage:

Such as when her former campaign manager for city council, who's been quoted elsewhere, is suddenly rather weak on Miers' abortion stance. Did the Times downplay what the woman actually said?

i think we have the answer to that.

here's the way the new york times presented it:

In a discussion with her campaign manager in 1989, Ms. Miers said she had been in favor in her younger years of a woman's right to have an abortion, but her views evolved against abortion, influenced largely by her born-again religious beliefs, said Lorlee Bartos, a Democratic campaign consultant in Dallas who managed Ms. Miers's City Council campaign.

they say they spoke with bartos who has pubicly stated that miers is on the 'extreme end of the anti-choice movement.' those are strong words and were apparently too strong for the new york timid which is why bartos' opinion gets so watered down in today's paper.

has everyone read cedric's post? he's highlighting c.i.'s entry on todd s. purdum and also noting some of the feelings among membres about outsiders who attempt to coopt the community so check it out.

in fact, yesterday was a strong day for the community all around. you had elaine explaining how diane feinstein, the great war hawk, profits from the invasion/occupation due to her husband's company. you had seth explaining how he didn't give a damn what was in hillary's heart, he cared about her actions. (here, here.) also check out c.i. who's hitting hard on the subject of harriet miers.

i just want to know if we're all supposed to be silent again and, cross our fingers, dems will take care of the candidate? it didn't happen with roberts.

i'm calling this ugh because for over 2 hours tonight, the program blogger has been down and you couldn't log in to write. mike lost his post. he wrote it and was going to post it at 7:03 p.m. and then head to his friend's debate but he hits post and gets this stupid error message. i think we're all pretty sick of blogger and of all the damn problems this program has. but it wouldn't kill any 1 if on your log in screen it would tell you 'blogger will be going down in 1 hour for maintance.' mike would have written a shorter post. he was really mad when i talked to him on the phone and there's no reason he should have lost that post because the people in charge of blogger don't have the sense to provide you with some sort of warning when you log in.








Posted by at