Maybe-Meirs Madness
Oct. 13th, 2005 12:03 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
jaunthieOkay, I'm going to go off on a rant again, so if that's not your bag, just move right along.
Still here? Good for you.
I've been seeing speculation across the media and the blogosphere that since the Republicans are doing such a "dandy" job ripping up on the Meirs nomination, maybe the Democrats should just sit back and not oppose the nomination. Some sources even go so far as to say that maybe the Democrats should even vote for her, since Bush could nominate someone "much worse" if she doesn't get confirmed.
This is, pardon my French, such an amazing load of merde that it's hard to know where to begin.
There is no way that ANYONE with even a smattering of intelligence, love for their country, or respect for the Constitution of the United States should be supporting this nomination. Republican, Democrat, Independent, Libertarian, Communist, Socialist, whatever - NOBODY should be supporting this nomination or even just kicking back and waiting to see what happens. EVERYONE should be opposing this nomination.
Why, do you ask? I can sum it up for you very simply:
Harriet Meirs is not professionally qualified to be a member of the Supreme Court.
That's not sexism, Mrs. First Lady. That's not partisanship. That's not politics. That's just plain facts.
Ms. Meirs has absolutely zero constitutional law experience. She has absolutely zero judicial experience. The President himself makes the case that her strongest qualification for the Supreme Court is that she is an evangelical Christian who will not change her views (her own personal history notwithstanding).
There is nothing in her work experience or background that qualifies Ms. Meirs for a Supreme Court position. Her very lack of experience and training makes this nomination ludicrous. We've already had ample evidence as to what happens when you put an unqualified person in a position of high power and responsiblity, from Michael Brown to Bobby Kennedy (he wasn't qualified to be AG by a long shot).
And those weren't lifetime appointments, the way Supreme Court positions are.
You let her on the court, and there's no remedy except voluntary resignation or death.
Our country and our court deserves the BEST candidates we can find. At the very least, it deserves qualified ones.
Ms. Meirs is neither. Ergo, no one should support this travesty of a nomination. Period.
And yes, there are OODLES of other reasons you could object to Ms. Meirs, from a number of different political, intellectual, and emotional standpoints. I personally think that it's extremely obvious that Bush picked her for her personal loyalty to him first, her evangelical Christianity second, and her gender third (there's plenty on the record about how he was only looking at females) - and that for these reasons alone, her nomination ought to be tossed into the shredder forthwith. But that's really irrelevant in face of the first, foremost, and most crucial factor: she's simply not qualified.
'Nuff said.
Still here? Good for you.
I've been seeing speculation across the media and the blogosphere that since the Republicans are doing such a "dandy" job ripping up on the Meirs nomination, maybe the Democrats should just sit back and not oppose the nomination. Some sources even go so far as to say that maybe the Democrats should even vote for her, since Bush could nominate someone "much worse" if she doesn't get confirmed.
This is, pardon my French, such an amazing load of merde that it's hard to know where to begin.
There is no way that ANYONE with even a smattering of intelligence, love for their country, or respect for the Constitution of the United States should be supporting this nomination. Republican, Democrat, Independent, Libertarian, Communist, Socialist, whatever - NOBODY should be supporting this nomination or even just kicking back and waiting to see what happens. EVERYONE should be opposing this nomination.
Why, do you ask? I can sum it up for you very simply:
Harriet Meirs is not professionally qualified to be a member of the Supreme Court.
That's not sexism, Mrs. First Lady. That's not partisanship. That's not politics. That's just plain facts.
Ms. Meirs has absolutely zero constitutional law experience. She has absolutely zero judicial experience. The President himself makes the case that her strongest qualification for the Supreme Court is that she is an evangelical Christian who will not change her views (her own personal history notwithstanding).
There is nothing in her work experience or background that qualifies Ms. Meirs for a Supreme Court position. Her very lack of experience and training makes this nomination ludicrous. We've already had ample evidence as to what happens when you put an unqualified person in a position of high power and responsiblity, from Michael Brown to Bobby Kennedy (he wasn't qualified to be AG by a long shot).
And those weren't lifetime appointments, the way Supreme Court positions are.
You let her on the court, and there's no remedy except voluntary resignation or death.
Our country and our court deserves the BEST candidates we can find. At the very least, it deserves qualified ones.
Ms. Meirs is neither. Ergo, no one should support this travesty of a nomination. Period.
And yes, there are OODLES of other reasons you could object to Ms. Meirs, from a number of different political, intellectual, and emotional standpoints. I personally think that it's extremely obvious that Bush picked her for her personal loyalty to him first, her evangelical Christianity second, and her gender third (there's plenty on the record about how he was only looking at females) - and that for these reasons alone, her nomination ought to be tossed into the shredder forthwith. But that's really irrelevant in face of the first, foremost, and most crucial factor: she's simply not qualified.
'Nuff said.
