Guest Post by Morbo
I was no fan of Harriet Miers. The woman was simply not qualified for a seat on the highest court in the land. After the Mike “Brownie, you’re doing a heck of a job” Brown fiasco, it infuriated me that Bush would be so arrogant as to name yet another crony for an important position.
Now the right wing is trying to claim it shared those concerns about Miers’ inexperience. What big, fat lies. Despite her slim file, the kook right would have been happy to support Miers had she given them some cause, such as a major speech slamming legal abortion or some evidence of anti-abortion or anti-gay activism as a lawmaker.
Instead, a different type of speech emerged, and that’s what did Miers in.
The ironic thing is, in that 12-year-old speech Miers merely reiterated what used to be a core conservative belief: individuals have a right to determine for themselves what type of life they will lead.
Miers praised “self-determination” on issues such as abortion and school prayer and added, “The ongoing debate continues surrounding the attempt to once again criminalize abortions or to once and for all guarantee the freedom of the individual to decide for herself whether she will have an abortion.”
She also said, “[W]e gave up…legislating religion or morality” and asserted, “When science cannot determine the facts and decisions vary based upon religious belief, then government should not act.”
In other words, Miers said nothing that Barry Goldwater would not have endorsed. “Self-determination” used to be the very essence of the conservative philosophy. Today, the only people on the right who ever bother to hoist that banner are the Libertarians.
After Miers’ withdrawal, the newspapers were full of articles about the “conservative” groups and activists that brought her down. That’s not accurate. I don’t know what the best term is to apply to the forces that did in Miers (although I have some ideas), but they certainly aren’t conservatives.