ARC's 1st Law: As a "progressive" online discussion grows longer, the probability of a nefarious reference to Karl Rove approaches one

Monday, October 17, 2005

Bad Poker

As we've pointed out in the past, this is not good poker.

What followed, according to the notes, was a free-wheeling discussion about many topics, including same-sex marriage. Justice Hecht said he had never discussed that issue with Ms. Miers. Then an unidentified voice asked the two men, "Based on your personal knowledge of her, if she had the opportunity, do you believe she would vote to overturn Roe v. Wade?"

"Absolutely," said Judge Kinkeade.

"I agree with that," said Justice Hecht. "I concur."

Shortly thereafter, according to the notes, Mr. Dobson apologized and said he had to leave the discussion: "That's all I need to know and I will get off and make some calls." (When asked about his comments in the notes I have, Mr. Dobson confirmed some of them and said it was "very possible" he made the others. He said he did not specifically recall the comments of the two judges on Roe v. Wade.)

And yes, I agree with Coulter that we shouldn't blindly support a nominee just because they are likely to overturn Roe v. Wade (or, preferably, provide reasonable restrictions). Instead, we should support nominees based on their abilities and their qualifications. Unfortunately, I have little information to demonstrate that Miers is wholly unqualified - and thought that this was ostensibly the goal of the judiciary committee hearings.

Given all the hand-wringing from the Right, the Bushies have had to reassure the base that Miers is what they need on the Supreme Court. Unfortunately, all that this is doing is increasing the likelihood that the nominee will be defeated and Bush will lose political capital on what started out as a sure thing.

Your Co-Conspirator,
ARC: St Wendeler