Letters reveal Miers' profound admiration for Bush
BY JAY ROOT
Knight Ridder Newspapers
Sun Herald"You are the best governor ever - deserving of great respect!" she wrote in 1997, in a belated birthday note that was typical of the tone she used in her correspondence with then-Gov. Bush.
The letter was one of a handful of personal notes included in more than 2,000 pages of do ents released Monday by the Texas State Library - most of them routine legal memos, press releases and transcripts. The letters offer a rare glimpse into the mutual admiration that sprung up between Miers and Bush after they began working together on Bush's first campaign for Texas governor in 1994.
Bush responded to her birthday wish in kind, and included a humorous, if baffling, postscript.
"I appreciate your friendship and candor. Never hold back your sage advice," he wrote. "P.S. No more public scatology." Whether Bush was referring to Miers' rough-and-tumble time as chairwoman of the Texas Lottery Commission or something else isn't clear. Scatology refers to "the study of or preoccupation with excrement or obscenity," according to Webster's dictionary.
Bush and Miers had met briefly at a banquet in 1989, but their political partnership began in late 1993, as Bush was preparing for a race against in bent Texas Gov. Ann Richards.
Dallas businessman Jim Francis, then Bush's campaign chairman, had recommended that he hire Miers, a prominent lawyer and the first female president of the State Bar Association of Texas, to be his general counsel.
She took the job and has been at Bush's side ever since. Now Bush wants to elevate his devoted friend to the highest court in the land. Some critics have questioned whether Miers was nominated based on friendship and loyalty alone.
Francis, however, said the friendship flows from a professional relationship and Bush's trust in her ability as a skilled lawyer.
" It's a personal relationship, but it's based on a very professional business working relationship. She calls him `sir' and `Mr. President,'" Francis said. Asked if the two were friends, Francis said: "I think they have a friendship, but it's based on a professional relationship. It's obvious that he likes her and she likes him. If that's a definition of friends, I think the answer is yes. But they're not buddies."
Indeed, Miers oozes with deference and awe in her letters to Bush. In a 1995 note, she thanked Bush for a visit and called a ride in a plane with him "Cool!" When she wrote Bush a thank-you note for meeting with a lottery job applicant in 1997, she wrote, "You are the best!"
Likewise, in a 1996 letter thanking Bush and his wife, Laura, for serving as chairs of a Dallas luncheon honoring Miers, the future Supreme Court nominee spoke of a little girl who'd raved about getting Bush's autograph.
"I truly believe if the governor told her she should be an Astronaut, she would do her best to become one," Miers wrote. "I was struck by the tremendous impact you have on the children whose lives you touch."
Bush had introduced Miers to the luncheon crowd with his now-famous description of his personal lawyer: "She looks so pe e and, well, harmless. But put her on your case," Bush said, "and she becomes a pit bull in size 6 shoes."
Bush, who nominated Miers to the high court on Oct. 3, has been roundly criticized for his choice by conservatives in the Senate and elsewhere. They contend that too little is known about Miers' conservative pedigree, and they're distressed that Bush failed to nominate someone in the mold of Justices Antonin Scalia or Clarence Thomas as he said he would in the 2000 campaign.
While Miers' confirmation hearings haven't been scheduled, they could start near Thanksgiving, said Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter, R-Pa.
Either Miers is the world's biggest ass-kisser, or there seems to be a little bit more than just mere 'admiration' going on between these two here. Maybe something along the lines of a school-girl crush. Very unprofessional.
She's a sicko, a supreme, sycophantic suck-up.
And dubya pads his bubble and life with sycophants so he doesn't have to face the reality that's he's too stupid and chicken to face.
dubya's own personal rot extends to everyhing he touches.
An asshole with an anti-Midas touch.
Actually a good portion of professional life is spent being "unprofessional".
well she did say Bush was the most brilliant person she had ever met in her life
George W. Bush
the current president
I think she is a nice lady. And I think you folks who don't agree have a reallllllly big problem. You got Bush for three more years and it is eating you alive.....Don't you just love it. I do.
October 12, 2005
Op-Ed Columnist
To Sir, With Love
By MAUREEN DOWD
WASHINGTON
W. was the best Harry ever had.
"You are the best Governor ever - deserving of great respect!" gushed Harriet Miers, then the Texas Lottery chief, to George W. Bush in 1997. The belated birthday card she sent her boss with a sheepishly eager puppy poking his head up and a poem that read: "This is the wish/That should have been sent/Before your birthday/Came and went."
According to a cache of mash notes released by the Texas State Library and Archives Commission in response to formal requests from The Times and other news organizations, Ms. Miers also told W. that he was "cool" and "the best!"; that he and Laura were "the greatest"; that Texas was "in great hands"; and that the governor should "keep up the great work. Texas is blessed."
Since there is no breathtaking Miers judicial record to pore over, I was eager to read more breathless Miers missives to a president she describes as the most brilliant man she has ever met. How could I get the notes from the White House, given how opposed Mr. Bush is to leaks? I called Scooter and Karl and they sent the secret do ents right over.
August 2001 "Thank you so much for letting me bundle up and drag away the brush that you cut down today. And if I might add, Sir, I've never seen a man wield the nippers so judiciously. It was awesome! You are the best brush cutter ever!!"
September 2001 "I found out today that you handed down a decision for the White House mess to offer three different kinds of jelly with its P.B.&J. sandwiches. Sweet!! As you know, I'm the only member of the staff who eats three meals a day in the mess. Now I get to have a different type of jelly at every meal! The mess is blessed to have a president who cares so much. I know I'm probably just flattering myself, but I like to think that you are thinking of me, also. (Smile.)
"P.S. Can you believe Condi cares more about W.M.D.'s than P.B.&J.'s?"
April 2002 "I was worried that it could go unstated in the rush of business around here, but I just wanted to pause and say how amazing it is that, after doing so much for the American people already, you keep showing up for work most days. We have to come, but you choose to. You're the hardest-working president ever!!"
October 2002 "I'm not sure Condi has made the time to thank you herself, so I just wanted to say how much we appreciated the tickets to 'Madame Butterfly' on Saturday night. I wore my long black robe - I mean, opera cape. I just wish it had had that song from 'The Sound of Music' - I know you love it, too - 'Cream-colored ponies and crisp apple strudels. ...' You're one of my favorite things, sir!"
January 2003 "Just a quick note to say how cool it is that you picked Brownie to head FEMA. There's nothing like having someone you know and trust in a top job. Your gut is the best judge ever!!"
April 2004 "There is no other president who would have had the courage to allow torture, dude! (It's only too bad that Abu Ghraib rules out Alberto's chances of getting on the Supreme Court.) You are the best torturer ever!! xo, H."
June 2005 "Make sure you take a good, long vacation this summer! Last year, you only took two weeks. You are pushing yourself way too hard, Sir!!"
August 2005 "I've half a mind to come down there myself and chase that witch, Cindy Sheehan, off your property with an injunction!! Yours, with you in Christ, Harriet."
September 2005 "In all this fuss about that bad-girl buttinsky Katrina, no one else seems to have noticed - not even Karen - that you've achieved your bold vision of losing that seven pounds. That extra week of mountain biking was so much more important than people realize. You're the most chiseled commander in chief ever, and the most rad guitar player ever!!"
October 2005 "How can I thank you, Sir? I never, ever expected the Supreme Court. Phat! I hope Clarence doesn't make me watch 'Debbie Does Dallas' again. That movie is so anti-Texas! I miss you already!!
"But now I will be able to serve your interests - and those of your family - forever and ever. If there's another recount you need help with, count on me. They say I don't have experience, but I've had the experience of polishing the boots of the wisest ruler since Solomon. I may not know stare decisis, but I know when to be starry-eyed. I await your instructions, Master."
dubya has poked himself in the eye, and goosed Harriet. Sounds like the Dems are gonna vote for her, and the Repubs are gonna vote against her.
poor dubya, what a pitiful dumb . The wheels are coming off his bandwagon, from which the rats are jumping daily. a lame duck president with 3 fruitless, sterile years remaining and who "controls" both houses of Congress.
and Fitz's indictments haven't even been filed, yet.
=============================
The New York Times
October 12, 2005
G.O.P. Aides Add Voices to Resistance to Miers
By DAVID D. KIRKPATRICK
As the White House seeks to rally senators behind the Supreme Court nomination of Harriet E. Miers, lawyers for the Republican senators on the Judiciary Committee are expressing dissatisfaction with the choice and pushing back against her, aides to 6 of the 10 Republican committee members said yesterday.
"Everybody is hoping that something will happen on Miers, either that the president would withdraw her or she would realize she is not up to it and pull out while she has some dignity intact," a lawyer to a Republican committee member said.
All the Republican staff members insisted on anonymity for fear of retaliation from their supervisors and from the Senate leaders.
At two stormy meetings on Friday - the first a planning meeting of the chief counsels to Republican committee members and the second a Republican staff meeting with Ed Gillespie, the former Republican Party chairman who is helping to lobby for the nomination - committee lawyers were unanimous in their dismay over Ms. Miers's qualifications and conservative credentials, several attendees said.
Many lawyers were critical or hostile, these people said, although Michael E. O'Neill, chief counsel to the committee chairman, Senator Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania, tried to remain relatively neutral. Mr. O'Neill could not be reached for comment.
"You could say there is pretty much uniform disappointment with the nomination at the staff level," another Republican on the committee staff said. "It is clear there is quite a bit of skepticism, and even some flashes of hostility."
Another Republican aide close to the committee said, "I don't know a staffer who approves of this nomination, anywhere. Most of it is outright hostility throughout the Judiciary Committee staff."
In an interview on Tuesday, Mr. Specter emphasized that the senators would make their own decisions.
"I think those staffers, like anybody else, have a right to their opinions and to express them," he said. "Senators will make independent judgments. You have some pretty strong staffers on the committee, but you have got some stronger senators."
Of the 10 Republicans on the panel, Senators Sam Brownback of Kansas and Tom Coburn of Oklahoma have expressed the most skepticism about Ms. Miers. Most decline to commit themselves.
Don Stewart, a spokesman for supporter on the committee, Senator John. Cornyn of Texas, said: "I think that the staff are all very well versed in the process and in this particular nominee, but so are the senators. I think you will see, and already have seen, quite a lot of support out of the senators."
The resistance among the panel lawyers reflects the challenge facing Mr. Bush in unifying his party and the conservative movement behind Ms. Miers.
On Tuesday, James C. Dobson, founder of the conservative evangelical group Focus on the Family, explained previous comments about confidential information that had influenced him to support Ms. Miers, a mystery that led some senators to threaten to call him to testify before the Judiciary Committee.
According to a transcript of his radio broadcast today, Mr. Dobson said he was referring to a confidential telephone conversation with Karl Rove, the president's top political adviser, about Ms. Miers that occurred two days before Mr. Bush announced her selection. Mr. Rove gave Mr. Dobson permission to discuss the call, and much of the information has now become public, Mr. Dobson said.
In addition to telling Mr. Dobson about her membership in a conservative evangelical church and her past support for an anti-abortion group in Texas, Mr. Rove assured him that Ms. Miers was the kind of conservative jurist that the president had promised to appoint, and that "the president knew her well enough to say so with complete confidence," Mr. Dobson recounted.
Republican staff members on the Judiciary Committee usually research and prepare arguments to defend the president's nominees. But Republican staff members on the panel said committee lawyers were doing research to rebut the "talking points" the White House has provided for senators to support Ms. Miers's nomination.
For example, committee lawyers said, the White House has told senators and conservative activists that Ms. Miers, as White House counsel, deserves credit for helping Mr. Bush select many strongly conservative federal judges. But lawyers for the committee say Ms. Miers, who became White House counsel last year, had no role in the most significant nominations.
People at the meeting on Friday of the judiciary panel lawyers said Mr. O'Neill, Mr. Specter's chief counsel , argued that Ms. Miers deserved a chance to speak for herself, especially because staff members were unacquainted with her legal work.
* Copyright 2005 The New York Times Company
Last edited by boutons; 10-12-2005 at 12:37 PM.
and here's shrub saying religion is an important aspect of and even qualification for Miers, why he chose her, while the Repubs was yelling everybody down that Roberts' religion absolutely must not be considered in his nomination. double-talking, double-standard, lying bas s.
Of course, dubya too ing stupid to understand what double-standard and intellectual dis/honesty is.
===============================
The New York Times
October 12, 2005
Bush: Miers' Religion Key Part of Her Life
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
Filed at 1:10 p.m. ET
WASHINGTON (AP) -- President Bush said Wednesday his advisers were telling conservatives about Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers' religious beliefs because they are interested in her background and ''part of Harriet Miers' life is her religion.''
''People are interested to know why I picked Harriet Miers,'' Bush told reporters at the White House. ''They want to know Harriet Miers' background. They want to know as much as they possibly can before they form opinions. And part of Harriet Miers' life is her religion.''
Bush, speaking at the conclusion of an Oval Office meeting with visiting Polish President Aleksander Kwasniewski, said that his advisers were reaching out to conservatives who oppose her nomination ''just to explain the facts.''
He spoke on a day in which conservative James Dobson, founder of Focus on Family, said he had discussed the nominee's religious views with presidential aide Karl Rove.
Not even a congressional recess nor Bush's preoccupation with hurricane recovery and affairs of state have shrouded the continuing controversy surrounding his selection of Miers to replace the retiring Justice Sandra Day O'Connor. Debate about Miers' credentials was prominent on the Sunday television talk shows and has continued to occupy considerable attention on the Internet.
Some of Bush's conservative critics say Miers has no judicial record that proves she will strictly interpret the Cons ution and not -- as Busy says -- ''legislate from the bench.'' They argue that Bush passed up other more qualified candidates to nominate someone from his inner circle.
On a radio show being broadcast Wednesday, Dobson said he discussed Miers with Rove on Oct. 1, two days before her nomination was announced. Dobson said Rove told him ''she is from a very conservative church, which is almost universally pro-life,'' but denied he had gotten any assurances from the White House that she would vote to overturn the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision that legalized abortion.
Sen. Patrick Leahy, ranking Democrat on the Judiciary Committee, said: ''The rest of America, including the Senate, deserves to know what he and the White House know.''
''We don't confirm Justices of the Supreme Court on a wink and a nod. And a litmus test is no less a litmus test by using whispers and signals,'' the Vermont senator said. ''No political faction should be given a monopoly of relevant knowledge about a nomination, just as no faction should be permitted to hound a nominee to withdraw, before the hearing process has even begun.''
Earlier Wednesday, Attorney General Alberto Gonzales asserted that Miers would bring ''a unique brand of experience'' to the high court and would that the concerns of critics would be eased once more is known about her.
Gonzales, himself once considered a leading candidate for a vacancy there, said there is ''nothing unique or earth-shattering'' about Miers' nomination and said people should give her time to say who she is and what she believes.
Also, presidential spokesman Scott McClellan acknowledged there were some prospective candidates who told the White House that they preferred not to be considered, citing the ordeal of the confirmation process.
''Washington scares people away? Is that new?'' McClellan asked. ''There are plenty of good people willing to be considered. The president found the best person.''
McClellan later said that ''it was just a couple of people'' who asked that their names be withdrawn, and it happened when the field of candidates was ''in the double digits.'' He declined to say whether ''a couple'' meant just two -- or more.
Asked why Rove would have discussed Miers' religious views if the president ascribes to a conservative judicial philosophy that backs a strict interpretation of the Cons ution regardless of one's views on various issues, McClellan said it was just part of an ''outreach'' to help people get to know Miers.
''What we have seen so far,'' Leahy said, ''is more of a commentary on the litmus tests and narrow motivations of vocal factions on the Republican right than it is a commentary on the qualifications of Harriet Miers.''
* Copyright 2005 The Associated Press
no joke
Harriet Ellan Miers was born in Dallas on Aug. 10, 1945.
Miers received her bachelor's degree in mathematics in 1967 and JD in 1970 from Southern Methodist University. Upon graduation, she clerked for U.S. District Judge Joe E. Estes from 1970 to 1972. In 1972, Miers became the first woman hired at Dallas's Locke Purnell Boren Laney & Neely.
In March 1996, her colleagues elected her the first woman president of Locke, Purnell, Rain & Harrell, at that time a firm of about 200 lawyers. She became the first woman to lead a Texas firm of that size.
Locke, Purnell eventually merged with a Houston firm and became Locke Liddell & Sapp, LLP, where Miers became co-managing partner of a firm with more than 400 lawyers.
Miers had a very distinguished career as a trial litigator, representing such clients as Microsoft, Walt Disney Co. and SunGard Data Systems Inc.
Throughout her career, she has been very active in the legal community and has blazed a trail for other women to follow.
* In 1985, Miers was selected as the first woman to become president of the Dallas Bar Association.
* In 1992, she became the first woman elected president of the State Bar of Texas. Miers served as the president of the State Bar of Texas from 1992 to 1993.
* She played an active role in the American Bar Association. She was one of two candidates for the number two position at the ABA, chair of the House of Delegates, before withdrawing her candidacy to move to Washington to serve in the White House. Miers also served as the chair of the ABA's Commission on Multijurisdictional Practice.
On numerous occasions, the National Law Journal named her one of the nation's 100 most powerful attorneys and as one of the nation's top 50 women lawyers.
Miers also has been involved in local and statewide politics in Texas.
* In 1989, she was elected to a two-year term as an at-large candidate on the Dallas City Council. She chose not to run for re-election when her term expired.
* Miers also served as general counsel for the transition team of Governor-elect George W. Bush in 1994.
* From 1995 until 2000, Miers served as chairwoman of the Texas Lottery Commission, a voluntary public service position she undertook while maintaining her legal practice and other responsibilities. When then-Governor Bush appointed Miers to a six-year term on the Texas Lottery Commission, it was mired in scandal, and she served as a driving force behind its cleanup.
Miers came to Washington, D.C., in 2001:
* She was appointed assistant to the president and staff secretary on Jan. 20, 2001.
* In 2003, Miers was promoted to assistant to the president and deputy chief of staff.
* Miers has served as counsel to the president since February 2005.
************************************************** ****
yup she is pretty stupid.. bah..
Dos misses the point completely.
I certainly would never suggest that she is "stupid" or use any such perjorative term to describe Ms. Miers.
But in looking at that resume, there's absolutely nothing (other than her association with the President) that makes Harriet Miers different than thousands of other attorneys across the country -- and none of those thousands of attorneys is qualified to sit on the Supreme Court and decide the sorts of issues that the Supreme Court considers. Her resume certainly does not offer any evidence of the sort of qualifications that one expects of a Supreme Court justice.
Again, its about a coherent jurisprudential approach to applying and interpreting the Cons ution, which doesn't come about without long and devoted study of the do ent and the development of the law that supports that do ent. It's about a willingness to understand that one's personal views do not come into play when deciding issues of cons utional law.
For instance, many decry Justice Stevens' opinion in Kelo, which upheld the right of the City of New London, CT, to take a woman's home under the eminent domain power. But Justice Stevens has gone on record as saying that he personally did not agree with the decision and that the result was as it was solely because precedent compelled the result. Say what you will about it, but in a strict textual sense, Justice Stevens is probably right: the Eminent Domain Clause of the 5th Amendment provides only "nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation." If the law says that using property to increase tax revenues is a public use (and it does) then the 5th Amendment, incorporated to the States by the 14th Amendment, supports what New London did. If there's a flaw in the law, it is up to the State Legislatures or Congress to remedy that flaw. Justice Stevens' acknowledged that too.
And yes, there are matters that are inherently cons utional in nature that require interpretation of the do ent, regardless of which side of the political spectrum you choose. As was mentioned in an earlier thread, the Cons ution says nothing of capital punishment, so the States and the federal government are permitted to execute convicts only if the Cons ution is interpreted to allow such punishment.
Results-oriented judges, on either side of the political spectrum, make bad law. It appears, from the recitations about Rove's conversations with Dobson, that the White House has expressly or tacitly made promises about the results that Miers will vote for on certain issues. No Supreme Court justice should ever be so politicized as to be beholden to a particular party, interest group, or President. If Ms. Miers' appointment is about an attempt to ensure particular results without regard to the existence of structural reasons to support those results, the damage to our system of cons utional governance could be substantial.
aren't most judges lawyers before they become judges..? I'd like to know the facts..
Who is qualified to sit on the Supreme Court is a determination made on a nominee by nominee basis by at least 51 US senators. There are no set rules for qualification. Although every past justice has been a lawyer, 41 of the 109 justices had no prior judicial experience.
But many of the justices who lacked hands-on experience as a jurist nonetheless had achieved a high level of accomplishment and stature as intellectual or political leaders prior to their nominations.
"Judicial experience is not a prerequisite, but what you look for in place of judicial experience is distinguished experience as a law professor or public official, and Miers really doesn't have either of those two," says Michael Comiskey, a political science professor at Penn State University at Fayette.
Most judges are lawyers before they become judges.
But being a judge on the United States Supreme Court is much, much different than being a judge on any other Court. I agree with Comiskey's statement. I also agree with Judge Bork's analysis that Miers' nomination is a disaster because she is not qualified by experience or education to sit on that Court.
I don't know but I think the hearings will decide if she is qaulified or not.. I don't understand all the uproar over this nomination after all it is only a nomination, which can either be accepted or rejected by the senate.. I say let the chips fall where they may...
Miers is just another examples of an totally incompetent, half-assed joker of a "president" propagating his own incompetence, inexperience, and inappropriateness into the SC. Miers primary qualification is a career of sucking off dubya, who loves to be sucked off by sycophants.
The Repugs profoundly despise federal government (their "libertarian" angle) and treat it like a piece of , appointing Allbaugh/Brown types of cronyistic, political hacks to critical governmental functions, while spending it into fiduciary .
Miers is described by Bush and his supporters as an evangelical Christian.
Dobson, in his public pronouncements, takes this as a leap of faith that she will be friendly to cultural right wing causes (i.e. overturning Roe).
Isn't it ironic that while the Texas State Lottery was opposed most vigorously by Evangelicals, she chose to serve as commissioner rather than politely declining?
Do you even think before you post? Furthermore, do you recognize that most people aren't psychotic and will have trouble understanding what you post?
Yikes.
Now you know how I feel when I read your pathetic posts.
Good article on Time's website about this nomination here. One of the quoted had a good point: Jimmy Carter also describes himself as an Evangelical, and said person would NOT support a Carter nomination to the SCOTUS.
Stringbean Ann Colder hates this nomination, which makes it good enough for me. On the other hand, FoF's James Dobson likes the nomination, so maybe my head will just explode from having to share a view with one of those two.
Topical funny bumper sticker:
Focus on your own damn Family!!!
The hearings will determine if she's qualified only if the members of the committee do their jobs. Of course, if the Democratic senators engage in serious questions about Miers experience, philosophy, or beliefs, they'll be castigated for turning the hearings into some sort of political spectacle -- for not simply rubber-stamping the President's nominee.
The bigger problem, I think, is that most people don't really understand either what the Supreme Court does or how it does it. The absence of pervasive knowledge concerning those matters allows the development of misconceptions about the complexities of the Court's tasks; that allows politicians to devolve the Court's activities into empty sound-byte sized catch phrases like "judicial activism," "strict constructionist," and "legislating from the bench."
Nobody seems really sure what any of those things mean.
But they're all sure that they want judges who aren't judicial activists (though judicial activism brought about desegregation of public schools, while a refusal to engage in judicial activism permitted the City of New London to seize a home to allow a more profitable commercial endeavor to begin).
They want judges who are strict constructionists, though the text of the Cons ution is far too vague, in many instances, to "mean only what it says."
And they want judges who won't legislate from the bench, but don't understand that with respect to cons utional issues, the Supreme Court is offered choices by the parties and must determine if a federal or state enactment does or does not comport with the Cons ution and that "legislating from the bench" has become synonymous with "striking down a law that I liked, regardless of what the Cons ution says."
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
