Translation: "Yes, you are right. There is a contingency plan for the withdrawal of Harriet Miers' nomination. But to save face, we will say that in the interest of maintaining the privilege of communications between the President and his counsel, she will be withdrawn as the nominee rather than release any information about her advice to the President."

Going into something without a contingency plan for the withdrawal... come on, would this president really do that?

I agree. This was a bad move from the start. The number of highly qualified conservative jurist offers a number of people better suited that the current nominee. Charles Krautheimer came up with the outline for the exit strategy. I think someone at the White House read the column and is moving in that direction.

According to John Fund in toda's WSJ, it's Andrew Card playing his old card that gave us Souter. I say fire Card for having brought us this embarrassment.

I get the impression that the stage is being set for the withdrawal of Miers' nomination. The White House is trying to create the illusion that disclosing her advice to the president will somehow jeopardize "confidentiality."

Everybody knows this is only a smokescreen. The real smoking gun is elsewhere - Miers has given advice which, if brought to the attention of the Senate, will never help in her confirmation. If there is nothing to hide why hesitate to hand in what the Senate demands?

So, the stage is being set for the withadrawal of Miers. Given the track record of this administration - that it never commits a mistake - it will fall on Harriet to withdraw herself in the interest of "national security" and saving the President's skin. Deja vu!

As repayment for her withdrawal, I'm sure she'll at least get some kind of (formerly) extremely prestigious award.

I hear she is a good person. A fine person.

I personally don't want to live in a society where every personal conversation is forced to be made public. Where does it end? Her public policy and public statements are her public self. I can make policy decisions that don't agree completely with my personal preferences...can't you? This educated woman prefers not to be tried...she's committed no crime. Her personal comments to a long time friend need not become public.

"I personally don't want to live in a society where every personal conversation is forced to be made public." --I dont think that the White House Oval office, advising the President constitutes a personal conversation. If ou want to live privatly, then dont join in on public politics.

If Harriet Miers' role in the White House was as personal attorney to George W Bush, that's one thing. But if she was there as advisor to the President...that is a public position, and there should be no reason that we should not know her actions and papers. A good lawyer presents arguments of both ways allowing the person to choose but pointing out the consequences. If she was deliberately choosing for the President, its'a choice for the people and we should have the right to know those facts and see those public papers.

Harriet Miers is a public servant. Why can't she disclose her work?

The President would be well-advised to withdraw Miers immediately, and hire her to replace Scott McLellan.

She's one hot mama! The American People deserve to see this (mighty) fine woman on a more regular basis. Don't hide her behind the bench! Put her on TV!

natalie, if the post she was being nominated for was "best friend forever" I'd agree, but this is for a lifetime seat on the Supreme Court of this republic. I think we're due some leeway in delving into her past. And it's not just private conversations w/bush that are being sought. We need much more than bush's word on this, I think you'll agree.

Harriet Miers is a person that should have never got herself involve in the public eye.
Ms. Miers knows to much about what wrong in the White House and GWB, QUIT at this time to live another day.

Good point Natalie, but on that same token, how about we nominate a JUDGE with a public record and not a lawyer who happens to be personal friend and counsel to the president? After all, we're looking for a judge.

Harriet Miers is a person that should have never got herself involve in the public eye.
Ms. Miers knows to much about what wrong in the White House and GWB, QUIT at this time to live another day.

It's obvious - there's incriminating evidence in the Miers papers that they dare not release. Perhaps details of W's involvement in Plamegate and the cover-up. Or his decision to allow torture at the concentration camp at Guantanamo. They will sacrifice Miers rather than allow American citizens to find out the truth.

The President wants the American people *and* the Senate to take him at his word?

HA!

He's shown us his word is completely and utterly worthless. I wouldn't trust the man if he told me 2 + 2 = 4.

I'm a fine person. I think I should get the job. My friends and family will back me up on that~ what more do you need?
Let's put aside for the moment the (very well-founded) idea that she's almost certainly advised Bush in matters the release of which would incriminate him.
This adminstaration has never shown any willingness to allow Congress to fulfill it's constitutional role of Avdice and Consent. They had no justification at all for witholding Bolton's documents, but that didn't encourage them to do it. They just went around Congress and their own duty to the intent of the Constitution. In fact, they're incredibly tight with any imformation at all and they've made it obvious that the only role they'll accept for Congress and the American People is to shut up and take what they're given.
Miers is no different than most of their appointments: a hack whose main qualification is loyalty. Likewise, the way they're handling Miers is no different than how they've handled anything else: the difference is that now we can see how embarrassingly incompetent and petulant it all is because the media are finally remembering that there role as reporters of fact is important.

I support Harriet Miers' nomination, but I think only because conservatives hate her so much. There is nothing else to go on.

"I personally don't want to live in a society where every personal conversation is forced to be made public." --I dont think that the White House Oval office, advising the President constitutes a personal conversation. If ou want to live privatly, then dont join in on public politics.

Posted by: scmason | Oct 24, 2005 3:07:19 PM

Here, here...she's as good as gone.IMHO

I THINK THAT ALL DEMOCRATS STINK. THEY WILL NEVER GET OVER THE FACT THAT BILL CLINTON GOT CAUGHT WITH HIS PANTS UNZIPPED.

HILLARY WILL NEVER FORGET SHE WAS SHAMED PUBLICLY. AND BILL & HILLARY WIL NEVER FORGIVE AL GORE FOR NOT STANDING UP WITH THEM AND THEIR SCANDALOUS AND UNCONNIVING WAYS THEY TRIED TO DECEIVE THE PUBLIC WITH.

WHAT IS WRONG WITH AMERICA IS THEY HAVE NO MORALS, NO VALUES. MY WONDERFUL PRESIDENT, MR GEORGE W. BUSH DOES. SO DID HIS MOTHER, AND FATHER.
I LOVE THE BUSHES, I DON'T CARE IF YOU DO OR NOT.

I LOVE GOD, MY COUNTRY, MY PRESIDENT, THE AMERICAN FLAG. ALL OF TEXAS, ALL OF THE BUSHES, INCLUDING BROTHER JEB.

I LOVE FLORIDA AND TERRY SCHIAVO.
I LOVE EVERYTHING EVEN THE WAR. MY PRESIDENT IS KEEPING IT OVER THERE AND NOT OVER HERE.

I LOVE A GOOD TALL KICK ASS PRESIDENT FROM THE GREAT STATE OF TEXAS.

I LOVE MY PRESIDENT & MRS. GEORGE W. BUSH. I LOVE ME. AND IF YOU DON'T LIKE THAT, I LOVE YOU TOO.

I WOULD LOVE FOUR MORE WONDERFUL YEARS OF THE BUSHES TOO.

I WOULD TO DEBATE THIS WITH YOU @ THE FOLLOWING ADDRESS.

MONA JOYNER
PO BOX 21493
SEATTLE, WA
98111-3493
(206)675-3248

I supported the nomination of Harriet Miers, at first. But as time goes by, this episode is becoming increasingly lame.

The questionnaire episode was bad and the president's vow to protect certain records of their conversations is worse.

http://middleamericachronicle.blogspot.com/2005/10/then-dont-appoint-your-friend-to-bench.html

The comments by persons who think that because Ms. Miers is a public servant everything she has said and done should be public ia naive. As a decision maker, if every thought, suggestion or recommendation brought to me by subordinate were made public, I couldn't function.

If she is an attorney advising the Office of the President, there has to be confidentiality for her communications. It is an attorney client relationship and only in the established exceptions to that relationship can there be disclosure.

I take no position on her nomination either way.

Curiosity killed the cat - and several other persons that cannot seem to behave as befits elders, with proper respect for things such as the contents of correspondence which are solely between the President of the USA and his trusted confidante, Ms. Miers, have got to learn that confidence disregarded is confidence destroyed. How would Ted Kennedy feel if the entirety of his sordid doings with respect to Ms. Kopechnic were to be splashed all over the pages of the NY Times! Ah, that is different! IS IT???

wow posting someone's address is a cheap shot....that can't be real no one is that stupid. Wonder what Mona did to piss someone off? I hardly think it would be a worth while debate when the best they could do is call democrats "stinky"

Made me smile though...

Curiosity killed the cat - and several other persons that cannot seem to behave as befits elders, with proper respect for things such as the contents of correspondence which are solely between the President of the USA and his trusted confidante, Ms. Miers, have got to learn that confidence disregarded is confidence destroyed. How would Ted Kennedy feel if the entirety of his sordid doings with respect to Ms. Kopechnic were to be splashed all over the pages of the NY Times! Ah, that is different! IS IT???

Too bad for you, Mona Joyner, GWB is a Texan in name only, and I don't think anyone cares about Clinton's impeachment. What is morally worse, having an extramarital affair, or invading a foreign country on false premises?
Go cry, I hope you feel protected from terrorists in Seattle, WA. :)

Well, Natalie, as others have pointed out, this is not a private matter. In addition, just remember this: if he'd nominated someone with an actual public track record he might have a leg to stand on... but she doesn't so there's no place else to look for her opinions. Other than her lovenotes to GWB, that is.
This is not a serious candidate; this is a transparent attempt to stack the court so that Bush and his friends can never be held accountable.

lets see Miers was a democrat, now she's a GOPer she was a Catholic now she's an evangelical, she was pro-choice now she's Pro-life...

What was that Bush said about her being able to make up her mind? lol

Hey Mona just finished reading Sy Hersh's Chain of Command....

What a book....should you care to face the truth it is an excellent starting point.

I hope that "BlueCat" is incorrect and that Mona Joyner, whoever she may be, is the actual poster of that message. Every political discourse should include a message in all caps, and that message should rapidly become a venting of spleen.

Mona reminds me of an old boss who ranted about McGovern (whoever that was) being a communist and who would end his diatribes with the simple, populist directive, "Think about it!"

"I personally don't want to live in a society where every personal conversation is forced to be made public." -- While I certainly don't think that all conversations with the President should be made public, I would still rather live in a society of open disclosure than anything resembling the Executive secrecy that we see with the current administration. The emails I write belong to the company that I work for and the government is supposed to work for us. National security should be the only exception at the end of the day. All other secrets are self serving to those in power and not in the best interest of the American people.

I'm sure that Harriet Miers is a fine christian woman and a competent corporate lawyer. But, let me get this straight...
When GWB was asked to provide a wee bit more information on who this woman is and how she thinks, the only thing he could say was, "Not gonna tell ya! You're just going to have to trust me on this."

Huh... Maybe it's time to start a program of random drug testing in the White House / Crawford, Texas.

I know who the first "random" person should be...

The reason we have systems and processes is just so people who are completely out of control as many of you are, will not influence the outcome of any important decision simply by spouting off. Let the process run its course and then accept the decision of the president and senators that you have elected to represent you. If you say "I didn't elect them" I say get out there and put up someone better. Some say, "Everybody lies." I don't believe that. A value is a value is a value whether one believes it is or not. I believe that in time history will prove that being led by a leader rather than a liar was best for America.

Wow, Mona...

How do you REALLY feel about the shrub? This time, don't hold back!

I'm a Republican - but for me, his nominating of Meiers was the last straw! What a selfish and arrogant thing to do. She is basically his personal lawyer. a supreme court justice should be one of the sharpest and most qualified legal minds in the country since the decisions that she/he makes will affect all 280 million of us. Instead of being loyal to her because she is loyal to him - Bush should be loyal to all 280 million americans and nominate the most qualified person he could find.

This president has blatantly lied to the american people in issues as deadly serious as going to war. So far,we have lost 2000 american citizens and untold millions of dollars due to a selfish and incompetent leader. Why would the nomination of another incompetent ignorant to the Supreme Court would be any different? She is his friend, as he is asking us to trust him. He knows her well, and that should be enough. Fortunately for our society, we are not as blind and simple minded, and republican or democrats, we know that this time we can see the president naked in all his tiny splendor.

Hi, JAH

I agree with your last sentence, "I believe that in time history will prove that being led by a leader rather than a liar was best for America". However, unfortunately the liar won and the leader lost in our last two Presidential elections.

If Miers is gonna vote against the gay rights, and against gay marriage, then obviously I'll have no choice but to recommend my Senator - whom I elected - and who happens to be a member of the Judicial Committee to reject Ms. Miers nomination.

Howver, if she's gonna promise during the hearings that 'yes, I'm gonna allow gay people in the US to register their marriages - it's their constitutional right, after all', then I'll recommend my Senator to vote FOR Miers, for in that case she's a very fine woman.

I am not a Republican, but I feel that Ms. Meirs may be the least offensive nominee that this President will nominate. I'd rather he nominate some ineffective rube than a true ideologue.

Perhaps we can all agree that this nominee has made the previous one seem positively ... qualified, despite any disagreements we may have with his ideology.

If President Bush nominates someone as Miers, I have another suggestion for filling the SC's vacancy: why doesn't President Bush nominate Michael Jackson for an Associate Justice? At least Michael has a longer experience with the courts and I'm sure he can be an outstanding justice.

Let's launch a website: www.michaelJackson4theSupremeCourt.com

Harriet's the nominee. Mission Accomplished.

Bush never intended for Miers to be confirmed....just wanted to make his next nominee look good compared to her.......

Thanks for your supportive comments!! I am really looking forward to this nominaton. People think I haven't studied up on the Constitution, but I know it quite well and may surprise a few people.

The Washington Post is the BEST.

Responding to Matchpoint's comment: No one disputes the long-settled legal notion of attorney-client privilege. It's the expansive "executive privilege" claimed by this White House for seemingly every piece of paper that is at issue. If Ms. Miers was representing Mr. Bush in litigation, there would be question that their communications would be private. Advice on matters of public policy --policies which we as taxpayers and voters need to know about --should not be privileged.

I would like to see the Post do a story discussing the history and background of Presidential "executive privilege." It's certainly NOT a well-established legal doctrine, and is asserted (and accepted by Congress and the press) much more often than it is actually tested in court. Indeed, in the most famous cases --Nixon's witholding the Oval Office tapes, and Clinton's wish to avoid a civil lawsuit while in office --the courts have refused to recognize the privilege's existence.

This is not the real Miers! The real one would have used the word "cool."

Is it me or is nobody discussing the Senate's use of the "nuclear option" were members to filibuster Miers' nomination?

Oh my God.........I couldn't believe my eyes when I saw Harriet Miers' post in her (4:45).... Who could have thought that she not only finds time to read the Washington Post, but she interacts with the bloggers too! Oh my God.... My husband's not gonna believe this when he gets back home... He's gonna be shocked when I tell him, that Miers PERSONALLY wrote a comment on Washington Post's blog....Oh my god....I need some valium, people...

I think it's a mistake to focus only on the relationship between Miers and W since his selection as president in 2000. Indeed, their relationship began long before that. One can only wonder what other skeletons are hiding in Miers' records that might be uncovered were that door opened?

I expect a Democratic president to probably nominate a liberal, and a Republican president to probably nominate a conservative (like Roberts). Fair enough. But is it too much to ask that his nominee at least knows enough about constitutional law that her answers to the Senate don't have to be sent back to be re-done because they resmeble the work of a sloppy school-child instead of someone who is qualified to be on the Supreme Court of the USA?

Why shouldn't we trust GWB with his nomination. About fifty one percent of you us voted to trust him with the security of the nation. We voted to trust him with decisions over nuclear weapons. Why can't you trust him with this simple little decision? Oh - - you realize now how stupid you were to trust him. Then instead of worrying about Ms. Miers, maybe it's more important to worry about her boss, and the puppet masters behind this "president". I'd say impeach Bush, but would mean handing the presidency to the King of the Puppet Masters - wouldn't it? Oh - and Mona, I have not worries about Clinton. I'd rather the President think with his D*CK, than not think at all.

The President is displaying his usual arrogance and contempt for what other smarter, brighter, more reflective, and knowledgeable people think. I think his personality consists of his feeling of God given right, by the silver spoon he inherited and never earned, coupled with a low intelligences and lack of critical thinking skills. His appointment of Harriet Miers is an insult to all American Citizens and the Supreme Court. Her primary qualifications are thinking Bush is God. Anyone that thinks he is brilliant says a lot about his or her intellect & ability. If she is confirmed than it shows, we have elected a bunch of idiots to the Senate, which I think is highly likely.

But in spite of the lack of any qualifications for the Supreme court she is probably a decent person and has many more qualifications for that job then George Bush has for President! From just viewing his policies without any knowledge of the one responsible, I think most would decide we had a Left Wing Liberal Democrat in office! His out of control spending & deficits, pork barrel lading bills, cronyism and the sheer stupidity & incompetence of lack of any foresight in managing Iraq after the conquest was total complete incompetence by him and his advisors.

His discovery after 5 years in office and 4 years after 9/11 that we have a serious Illegal Alien Invasion with millions of poorly educate people pouring across our open borders is beyond belief. His brilliant solutions to the problem is just make them legal! Than we won't have an Illegal Alien problem. It shows he has no concept of what problems will be caused by having millions more poorly educated , prolific breeders with a 50% high school drop out rate, the billions in cost for their benefit's, the crime, the lowing of our standard of living & erosion of the Middle class ,will have on this country! It also shows disrespect for Laws & the Rule of Law, as he proved again with the Meirs nomination to the Supreme Court! While I feel sorry for Miers that was threw into a situation and position she is clearly not qualified by a Stupid President with a King George Complex, this feeling does not extend to King George! I am one of his many Ex-supporters that feel betrayed by this President! I think if the Republican does not disavow his policies that it will set the Republican Party back years. They will have a hard time taken seriously again, that they are capable of an honest, effective, corrupt free, smaller government!

This is getting out of hand. Harriet Miers is just as qualified to be a supreme court justice as any of the fancy pants ivy leaguers that folks seem to think should have a lock on supreme court seats. Constitutional law isn't rocket science, and having a sheepskin from Harvard or Yale is no guarantee of wisdom - all too often, it is quite the contrary.

2LBJ Fan: I wanna go to Harvard or Yale, because I want to make a difference in the world. Anyone can give me some advice how to get to Harvard or Yale? I dream about the Ivy League day and night....

Republicans & Bush supporters are increasing questioning what kind of man they elected as President! His popularity & administration is sinking into the swamp of cronyism, incompetence, and an increasing stink of corruption!

His insistence on appointing unqualified political cronies to high positions is a cause for alarm to most Americans of both parties. From Brownie to his recent nomination of Harriet Miers for the Supreme Court and the withdraw of Timothy Flanigan nomination after facing weeks of questions over his ties to the lobbyist Jack Abramoff & Karl Rove. His main political brain and probable brain, Karl Rove likely indictment over the leaks of CIA operator's names, increasing speaks of not only cronyism, but of corruption in high places!

Far from the smaller, honest, effective government that most thought they were voting for his administration has used tax dollars like know other government in history to reward supporters and buy votes. His policy of using Federal money for pork barrel laden bills & tax cuts without any attempt to control the growth of big government & spending, and with a large & ever growing out-of-control deficits has many realizing the man they thought they elected is not the man they got!

His rewarding of the Medal of Freedom to George Tenet for one of the greatest intelligence failures in American history leaves a bad taste in the mouth of most Americans. This has also left many wondering if it was a reward for supporting his determination to go to war in Iraq with or without WMD or ties to terrorist!

The failure in Iraq of any planning of how to control or administrate the country after the war, in spite of warning from both within and outside of his administration, strikes many as gross incompetence on the part of him and his advisors!

To add insult to injure, the asinine remarks of Romsfeld that you go to war with what you got, coupled with the lackadaisical approach to getting Armor for our troops, which has accounted for most of the casualties in Iraq, seems to many a total lack of concern for the ones paying the price and fighting an increasing unpopular war!

The war in Iraq has the opposite of the desired affect, instead of protecting us from terrorist it has reenergizes terrorist world wide and made it a recruiting ground for terrorist and terrorist training. We are now bogged down in an unpopular costly war without a viable exit plan.

The dismal failure to respond to Hurricane Katrina after billions of dollars & years of planning increasing demonstrates incompetence and wasting of billions in tax dollars by his administration!

Vice Presidents Chancy transformation from wise experienced advisor to the prototypical corrupt CEO that ripped employees & share holders off for billions is now complete! Due to the rewarding of no bid contacts in Iraq to his ex-company and other big company contributors to Bush's reelection & the resulting inexplicable loss of billions of dollars. In a brazen display of unequaled arrogance they did the same thing again in rewarding no bid contacts for rebuilding after Hurricane Katrina to the same companies!

Bush's planned policy on giving millions of Illegal Aliens green cards as a reward for breaking our laws, is a blatant display of ignoring the wishes of 85% of the American public. His determination & desire to reward contributors with cheap labor at the expense of American jobs and billions in tax dollars to subsidize their many benefits, proves that the welfare of the country and American citizens is subordinate to his desire in rewarding the Rich and Powerful for their support!

His failure to control our open borders and continue to allow Mexico & Latin American to export their poverty to the USA by the millions 4 years after 9/11 seems too many, to bring in question, his concern with terrorist and fighting terrorism! Indeed, many question if another terrorist attack is not desired by this administration to allow him to parade with a bull horn & make asinine remarks like bring them on! To again demonstrate to the country and world that he is the bravest Chicken Hawk in the USA & stem the free fall of his sinking popularly & policies!

What many took for a brave resolute leader now appears to be something far different! A complete arrogances & inability to recognize or admit mistakes, the comprehension of an chicken, and if intelligence was measured by height, many now realize ,he would undoubtedly be a dwarf!

Bill Lowe...... a totally disgusted Ex-Bush supporter!

Do you get the feeling that the Miers nomination is a feint, done to attract attention & make the next nominee look better in comparison?

Credit to Miers for falling on her sword for the boss.

Actually I think I should be Supreme Court Justice....I'm a nice person, Honest I am...:)

1. If Miers gets confirmed as a Supreme Court Justice, what will that mean for me?

Miers would replace Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, who has been the swing vote protecting the right to choose on the Supreme Court. Miers' nomination means that she could tip the balance in cases that affect women's reproductive freedom. The American public deserves to know whether she would jeopardize fundamental freedoms that O'Connor historically protected -- and it's up to the Bush administration and Miers to be candid about where she stands.

2. When are the Supreme Court hearings happening?

The Senate hearings on the Miers nomination are scheduled to start on Monday, November 7. The Bush administration wants her to have a full Senate vote by Thanksgiving so that she can sit on the Court for important upcoming cases on the right to choose.

3. Remind me what the upcoming Supreme Court cases are about.
Here's one: On November 30, 2005, the Supreme Court will hear Ayotte v. Planned Parenthood of Northern New England. The case challenges a law restricting young women's access to abortion, but the issues the Court will consider are much broader than that. The Court could eliminate its longstanding requirement that women's health must always be protected when the state regulates abortion. The outcome of this case could affect virtually every abortion-related case and law in the country, and make it more difficult, if not impossible, for pro-choice advocates to challenge anti-choice laws in court.

4. What was the buzz about right-wing activists getting insider information from Karl Rove?
Just after Harriet Miers was nominated, James Dobson -- founder of the ultra-conservative Focus on the Family -- told the media that Karl Rove had given him the inside scoop on Miers: "When you know some of the things that I know that I probably shouldn't know...you will understand why I have said...that I believe Harriet Miers will be a good justice." To James Dobson, a "good justice" means someone who will vote to overturn Roe. We'd like to know: why does Dobson get high-level information before the Senate and the American public does?

5. What should I think about Miers' 1989 pledge to "actively support" anti-choice causes in Texas?
In a document delivered to the Senate Judiciary Committee, it appears that when Miers ran for Dallas City Council in 1989, she pledged to "actively support" a constitutional amendment banning all abortions nationwide except to save a woman's life. She also vowed to participate in anti-abortion rallies and work to block pro-choice citizens from serving on health-related commissions. Those written promises were made to Texans United for Life. The Senate must press Miers on her statements to find out whether they represent her position on the right to choose today. If she answered these questions running for city council, she should answer them for a lifetime appointment on the Supreme Court.

6. Who are Griswold and Eisenstadt, and what do they have to do with Harriet Miers?
Griswold and Eisenstadt were parties in important Supreme Court cases establishing the right to privacy. In these cases, the Supreme Court struck down laws that prohibited the use of birth control, citing privacy as a constitutional right and laying the groundwork for Roe v. Wade. Harriet Miers has made conflicting statements about whether she agrees with these important decisions. Miers may not support the foundations of Roe v. Wade, and with important cases like Ayotte coming up, we've got to stay vigilant if we are to protect a woman's right to choose.

This nomination is too important to have been bungled so thoroughly. It seems very possible that the Meiers nomination is indeed an elaborate feint to distract from the actual intended nominee and other current events. Hopefully it has backfired somewhat.

Why does Bush always seem to refer to how "fine," "good-hearted," or "extraordinary" people are, instead of talking about how qualified, smart, or decisive someone is? Harriet Miers may be a fine woman,but is she qualified for the Supreme Court?

Arlanger,
1) Because Bush ain't qualified, smart, or good at multitasking "decisive" beyond 1-2 issues at a time, and so he prefers to avoid such complex personal judgements which other could argue with him on.

That could be one explanation. (He focuses on traits he can understand and are totally subjective, while hitting the big positive words.)

The other explanation is that he finds people who are polite and abstain from critcizing his truly to be fine, good-hearted, or extraordinary.

So, he consider their yes-men (or yes-women) skills to be more important than the actual work they can do. This is a shattering, but significant possibility.

This is a president who takes more vacations than Reagan took naps, and who has been known to delay in crisis.

Neither analysis is flattering, and for the sake of decency, I wish I could think up a more flattering explanation.

Who doesn't want to be nice, extraordinary, and goodhearted, after all?

Alas, to create a better explanation would require actually liking the demeanor, agenda, policies, political goals, public morals, or administrative skills of our current President of the United States.

I just don't see any evidence that he could be called successful in anything except getting elected.

I really and truly believe that Harriet Miers is the best that President Bush can find, and I trust his judgment without reservation. This fine Christian Texas lady knows at least as much about the law as Justice Thomas, and President Bush is on record saying he wants another Justice just like him. Heck, it seems to me that we should not question our duly elected Leader of the Free World--he has a mandate to rule this country as he and his Christian advisors see fit! And why don't the liberals and the media leave Karl Rove and Scooter Libby alone? These fine Christian men brought us "shock and awe" in Iraq back when we really needed it! The 2000 fine Christian soldiers have died for their country willingly, and would do so again if the Leader of the Free World asked them to! And who cares about those Louisiana and Mississippi and Alabama freeloaders who just want free Katrina stuff handed to them without working for it? I bet those people who complained about "guv-mint" not doing this and not doing that are just welfare mamas anyway! Why should we care what happens to them poor ignorant southerners anyway. They just want something for nothing and are hiding behind a hurricane. And I think ALL the hurricanes should be named for women, because they should know there place. The Bible says women should obey there male masters. And leave President Bush alone. He is a fine Christian man and our Leader of the Free World and doesn't use cocaine or drink anymore. Since he chose Harriet Miers to be on the United States Supreme Court, then his judgment ought to be respected. They are not crooks or incompetence.

Gandelf- Your comments reflect your immense attunement with GWB and his ideologies- you must be "soul brothers" Thank God this is America and not Germany circa 1945- It goes to show "The Christian Right is neither'

The White House is in a free fall. Miers is just one of the issues that will be 'handled' to stop the free flow. Like Reagan, around post-Iran-Contra times, this White House will get rid of Libby, Rove and Miers. Cheney and his minions stock will go down, moderates will be brought in and the White House will focus on attempting to 'govern' in a new way, to save the GOP and President Bush's presidency. The liklihood of a strict constructionist as a replacement for Miers is weak since the President can't afford this type of battle with a 38% positive poll number. Cheney owes Bush his resignation as he's the one who's weakened the President.

It's nice to see some of the comments are from those who actually at one point supported the president but now have opened their eyes. I suspect they have always been die-hard republicans and could not bring themselves to vote for anything else. The president's selection of Miers for the supreme court is one more in a long line of absolutely absurd and ignorant decisions that he has made. I cannot think of ANY decision that this president has made that has been for the good of this country. From taking us to war with a country that did not threaten or attack us and had nothing to do with 9-11 (yet he still mentions 9-11 and Iraq in the same sentence all the time). Claims he is winning the war on terrorism (yet he has been the greatest recruiter for terrorists the world has ever seen). Has totally destroyed this countries image with others around the world (we used to be thought of as just, now we are thought of as just dangerous). I could go on and on but its really too late, his advisors capitalized on the ignorant American public(he does not have the brains to have done it) and was re-elected. I only hope that one day we can win back some of the American reputation that he has trashed.

For those who are thinking "what a bleeding heart liberal democrat!" I must say that I have voted in 7 presidential elections and 6 of them were for the republican candidate, I'm no democrat! I am proud to say that it was apparent to me after the first 4 years that George Bush was and is a mental midget and I voted for a democrat for the first time in my life. HOW COME THE REST OF YOU REPLUBLICANS COULD NOT SEE IT!

Our philosophy is "Let 'em eat cake." We who have made the big money have earned our tax breaks and our perks. What do ordinary people know about running this country that they haven't learned from the people who hire others to work for them. They should accede to President George W. Bush's nomination of Miers and trust him on that. When and if they "get theirs" like I got mine, they'll know it's important to protect those who make the rules to benefit those who make the money. That's the ultimate reality in this world. It's true, Leona, only the little people pay taxes!

"mental midget" Teehee.. Good one KC :)

Ms. Wealthy and loving it. I am praying your post was satire...

It is that "Let them eat cake" mentality that has gotten our country in the mess it is in. There are other issues involved here not just material ones. I find people who vote for a president because of a "tax break" to be the most vile creatures on earth. They are a menace to our country. It is socially irresponsible to care nothing about the working people of this country. The poor are suffering under the Neocons!! It is also the poor who are fighting and have always enlisted in the military to protect YOU...
The Non rich of this country are the very fabric of our society. You may well be looking up at a "poor" surgery tech one day from an operating table. YOU are not that important there is always someone willing to spend money but the nurse, waitress, teacher, trash man, cableman, grocery clerk, etc. are the blood and veins of our nation. Without them you would have to *gasp* work yourself...and you would have no where to spend your precious money....

A blue collar revolution is close at hand...

http://www.majorclick.com/home/members/stocks/hotss/shemales/vmloxeo/hawaiian.html talentstitillatedtusk