Attention, Pentagon: body armor isn’t only needed for the troops in Iraq but for Harriet Miers who just received a brutal punch in the gut from Wall Street Journal bigwig John Fund who is no longer urging conservatives to mute their skepticism:
But that was before I interviewed more than a dozen of her friends and colleagues along with political players in Texas. I came away convinced that questions about Ms. Miers should be raised now–and loudly–because she has spent her entire life avoiding giving a clear picture of herself. “She is unrevealing to the point that it’s an obsession,” says one of her close colleagues at her law firm.
White House aides who have worked with her for five years report she zealously advocated the president’s views, but never gave any hint of her own. Indeed, when the Dallas Morning News once asked Ms. Miers to finish the sentence, “Behind my back, people say . . .,” she responded, “. . . they can’t figure me out.”
Read it all yourself. You read it and wonder: (1) if Miers can survive this onslaught (she can) and, (2) if she survives it (which she most likely will) doesn’t it mean George Bush has a problem since under the new bankruptcy laws he might not to be able to do much now about his amount of political capital. Here’s another key quote:
It is traditional for nominees to remain silent until their confirmation hearings. But previous nominees, while unable to speak for themselves, have been able to deploy an array of people to speak persuasively on their behalf. In this case, the White House spin team has been pathetic, dismissing much of the criticism of Ms. Miers as “elitism” or even echoing Democratic senators who view it as “sexist.” But it was Richard Land , president of the Southern Baptist Convention, who went so far as to paint Ms. Miers as virtually a tool of the man who has been her client for the past decade. “In Texas, we have two important values, courage and loyalty,” he told a conference call of conservative leaders last Thursday. “If Harriet Miers didn’t rule the way George W. Bush thought she would, he would see that as an act of betrayal and so would she.” That is an argument in her favor. It sounds more like a blood oath than a dignified nomination process aimed at finding the most qualified individual possible. ….
And, really, he’s right. If Land’s quote is a message to conservatives — and to Miers — you have to ask yourself: are we talking about someone who wants to join the Sopranos’ family or the Supreme Court?
…”This is the most closely divided court in history,” says Jay Sekulow , a conservative legal activist who backs Ms. Miers. “Everybody knows what is at stake here.” With such high stakes, it should disappoint everyone that the Senate will now have to debate the confirmation of a nominee who, when it comes to Constitutional law, resembles a secret agent more than a scholar.
Who needs slasher horror movies when you can watch this?