Perhaps not the conservative after all...

[Brwn_eyes0511]

A Sampling of the Writings of Harriet Miers
A look at the paper trail of President Bush's Supreme Court nominee

Posted Monday, Oct. 03, 2005

What kind of Supreme Court justice would Harriet Miers be? For anyone trying to assess her qualifications, analyze her philosophy and predict her behavior, Miers would seem to present a fairly blank slate. She has no judicial resume and hasn't left a long trail of noteworthy memos, briefs, oral argument transcripts or law journal articles.

Gay Rights

An indication of her stance on gay rights comes from this questionaire from the Lesbian/Gay Political Coalition of Dallas Miers filled out while running for the Dallas City Council in 1989. In it, she supported full civil rights for gays and lesbians and backed AIDS education programs for the city of Dallas. (Source: Quorumreport.com)

Views on the Law

Elsewhere, a search for indications of her personal views and writing skills turned up two articles penned by Miers for the legal publication Texas Lawyer. They show a concern for the rule of law—and an emphasis on collegiality, compromise and determination:

In 1992, while president of the state bar, Miers wrote in the publication Texas Lawyer about the effect on the criminal justice system of an episode in a Fort Worth courthouse, where in July of that year, a man angry about his divorce went on a shooting spree, killing two lawyers and wounding two judges and a prosecutor before surrendering at a TV station:




"The same liberties that ensure a free society make the innocent vulnerable to those who prevent rights and privileges and commit senseless and cruel acts. Those precious liberties include free speech, freedom to assemble, freedom of liberties, access to public places, the right to bear arms and freedom from constant surveillance. We are not willing to sacrifice these rights because of the acts of maniacs."

"Punishment of wrongdoers should be swift and sure. Only then can the criminal justice system serve as an effective deterrent. Those who would choose a rule of man rather than the rule of law must not escape fitting penalty. Again, the lack of adequate resources to support an overburdened criminal justice system looms as a reality. Punishment may come swift and sure in the Fort Worth slayings case because of their notoriety. But we cannot forget the other cases crying for justice languishing in courts throughout Texas and the nation."

"We all can be active in some way to address the social issues that foster criminal behavior, such as: lack of self-esteem or hope in some segments of our society, poverty, lack of health care (particularly mental health care), lack of education, and family dysfunction."

"We lawyers are trained in problem-solving and we have the leadership and other opportunities available to professionals in our society. The two men who died exemplified individuals devoted to their God, their families, their fellow man, their communities and their profession. Speakers in both memorial services, used the very same words: ‘Well done, good and faithful servant.’"

"Our sense of helplessness and inability to understand why tragedies like these have to occur should not cause anyone to attempt to explain the Fort Worth shootings as expressions of frustration with judges, lawyers or the justice system. Plain and simple, they are despicable acts—examples of the worst nature of man. The rest of us are challenged even more to demonstrate the best."

http://www.time.com/time/nation/arti...112940,00.html

[dissention]

Originally Posted by Brwn_eyes0511

Gay Rights

An indication of her stance on gay rights comes from this questionaire from the Lesbian/Gay Political Coalition of Dallas Miers filled out while running for the Dallas City Council in 1989. In it, she supported full civil rights for gays and lesbians and backed AIDS education programs for the city of Dallas. (Source: Quorumreport.com)

She opposed the decriminalization of anti-sodomy laws. She's also anti-choice, having attended a great number of anti-choice fundraisers.

The reason she was chosen was because she's not a known nutbag like Priscilla Owen. She's a nutbag without the record to show it and nominating her was a masterful move. She's only being accused of not being conservative enough so that she comes across as a moderate, thus making any fillibuster attempt look very bad for the Democrats.

[Rickypt]

What does supporting AIDS education have to do with gay rights?

Main issue is that Bush has nominated such a crony. It smells. Had he not campaigned as someone who was gonna restore dignity and honor to the presidency, it wouldn't be such a big deal. He is nothing but giving jobs to his poorly qualified chums. Give me a cheating Clinton any day.

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by Rickypt

What does supporting AIDS education have to do with gay rights?

Main issue is that Bush has nominated such a crony. It smells. Had he not campaigned as someone who was gonna restore dignity and honor to the presidency, it wouldn't be such a big deal. He is nothing but giving jobs to his poorly qualified chums. Give me a cheating Clinton any day.

Amen - that post is just such rank spin. If you go to the actual questionaire she completed http://www.quorumreport.com/downloadit.cfm?DocID=4747 - you will see that she is far from any friend to the gay community.

For example, she specifically notes she supports AIDS education because it is a community wide problem.

She also does not comment on the question asking whether it should be illegal for the city of Dallas not to hire someone because they are gay - she instead demurs by saying "I believe that employers should be able to pick the best qualified person for any position to be filled considering all relevant factors," which in no way addresses the question and, for anyone who knows anything about political speech, means she thinks gay people ought not to be hired. Otherwise, why not answer the question directly with a "yes, I think it is wrong not to hire someone just because they are gay," which is what the question asked.

Finally, she answers "yes" to the question "Do you believe that gay men and lesbians should have the same civil rights as non-gay men and women." However, she stated she was not for the repeal of Section 21.06 of the Texas Penal Code which states:

Sec. 21.06. HOMOSEXUAL CONDUCT.

(a) A person commits an offense if he engages in deviate sexual intercourse with another individual of the same sex.

(b) An offense under this section is a Class C misdemeanor.

So, that negates her "yes" to gay civil rights. In other words, she is not opposed to straight people fellating and sodomizing, just gay people.

This woman is a screaming religious conservative on hot issues. No two ways about that

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by Rickypt

What does supporting AIDS education have to do with gay rights?

Main issue is that Bush has nominated such a crony. It smells. Had he not campaigned as someone who was gonna restore dignity and honor to the presidency, it wouldn't be such a big deal. He is nothing but giving jobs to his poorly qualified chums. Give me a cheating Clinton any day.

Interestingly, nominating someone who has never been a judge is not a new thing. Rehnquist was never a judge and I believe there were others

[dissention]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

Interestingly, nominating someone who has never been a judge is not a new thing. Renquist was never a judge and I believe there were others

Yeah, but they were names with public positions on issues. Not Miers.

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by dissention

Yeah, but they were names with public positions on issues. Not Miers.

She has some public service and notariety:

Miers is the current White House Counsel in the Republican administration of U.S. President George W. Bush. She was Deputy Chief of Staff prior to her appointment as White House Counsel to replace Alberto Gonzales when he became Attorney General. Prior to her service in the Bush administration, Miers was a lawyer in private practice for 27 years, mostly handling business cases, and served as the first woman president of both the Dallas Bar Association and later the State Bar of Texas. She also served one term on the Dallas City Council.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harriet_Miers

So, I think this issue is a bit of a red herring.

The far more important issue to me is:

Valley View Christian Church in Dallas was Miers's church from 1980 until she moved to Washington, D.C. to work for Bush. The church is evangelical and independent of any formal denomination. It also holds beliefs and practices that are taught in many churches of the Southern Baptist Convention. While being independent, the church's teachings on salvation through Christ is consistent with orthodox evangelical theology, as is its statement of beliefs.

When pastor Ron Key was asked about Miers's views, he said, "her personal views are consistent with that of evangelical Christians… You can tell a lot about her from her decade of service in a conservative church." [3] If Miers holds the same or similar beliefs of her former church, then she is likely to be an Evangelical Christian.

Miers is a former board member of Exodus Ministries, a Dallas-based "non-denominational Christian organization established to assist ex-offenders and their families become productive members of society by meeting both their spiritual and physical needs." [4] It should not be confused with the "ex-gay" ministry Exodus International.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harriet_Miers

That is just downright scary shiite.

[dissention]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

She has some public service and notariety:

Pffffft. She has notoriety in Texas as a corporate lawyer, not much else. There is no paper trail; her positions are largely unknown. Point being that was not the case with judges like Rehnquist; they had no judicial experience, but they were not unknowns with unknown positions.

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

The far more important issue to me is:

Valley View Christian Church in Dallas was Miers's church from 1980 until she moved to Washington, D.C. to work for Bush. The church is evangelical and independent of any formal denomination. It also holds beliefs and practices that are taught in many churches of the Southern Baptist Convention. While being independent, the church's teachings on salvation through Christ is consistent with orthodox evangelical theology, as is its statement of beliefs.

When pastor Ron Key was asked about Miers's views, he said, "her personal views are consistent with that of evangelical Christians… You can tell a lot about her from her decade of service in a conservative church." [3] If Miers holds the same or similar beliefs of her former church, then she is likely to be an Evangelical Christian.

Miers is a former board member of Exodus Ministries, a Dallas-based "non-denominational Christian organization established to assist ex-offenders and their families become productive members of society by meeting both their spiritual and physical needs." [4] It should not be confused with the "ex-gay" ministry Exodus International.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harriet_Miers

That is just downright scary shiite.

Of course it is, but Shrub wouldn't have it any other way. It's precisely why the "outrage" over her not being conservative enough is manufactured ridiculousness.

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by dissention

. . . Of course it is, but Shrub wouldn't have it any other way. It's precisely why the "outrage" over her not being conservative enough is manufactured ridiculousness.

Yep - esp. when it is proffered that her "advocating" AIDS educational etc. for the total community somehow equates to a pro gay rights position

[Rickypt]

I'm not saying she is necessarily poorly qualified because she's not a judge. I just don't think her legal experience stands out in any remarkable way. All Bush can really say about her is that he knows her heart; he can't make a case that she is well-qualified for the bench. Of course, we know that he knows her policy positions which is why he chose her. That and she's a good friend.

[Brwn_eyes0511]

Originally Posted by dissention

She opposed the decriminalization of anti-sodomy laws. She's also anti-choice, having attended a great number of anti-choice fundraisers.

The reason she was chosen was because she's not a known nutbag like Priscilla Owen. She's a nutbag without the record to show it and nominating her was a masterful move. She's only being accused of not being conservative enough so that she comes across as a moderate, thus making any fillibuster attempt look very bad for the Democrats.

Well let's not start talking about the filibuster and Democrats...my LORD!

But, as a conservative, I along with others have many reservations about this lady whom most of us know nothing about really.

[gldstwmn]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

Interestingly, nominating someone who has never been a judge is not a new thing. Rehnquist was never a judge and I believe there were others

There were a lot. I'll post a list later.

[strandinthewind]

The unification of church and state
Molly Ivins - Creators Syndicate

10.04.05 - AUSTIN, Texas -- Uh-oh. Now we are in trouble. Doesn't take much to read the tea leaves on the Harriet Miers nomination. First, it's Bunker Time at the White House. Miers' chief qualification for this job is loyalty to George W. Bush and the team. What the nomination means in larger terms for both law and society is the fifth vote on the court to overturn Roe v. Wade.

Aside from that bothersome little matter, the Miers appointment is like that of John Roberts -- could've been worse. Not as bad as Edith Jones, not as bad as Priscilla Owen -- and you should see some of our boy judges from Texas.

Miers, like Bush himself, is classic Texas conservative Establishment, with the addition of Christian fundamentalism. What I mean by fundamentalist is one who believes in both biblical inerrancy and salvation by faith alone.

She is enrolled in the Valley View Christian Church of Dallas, which she attended for at least 20 years before moving to Washington five years ago. Among that church's other members is Nathan Hecht of the Texas Supreme Court, considered second only to Priscilla Owen as that court's most adamant anti-abortion judge.

According to Miers' friends, she was pro-choice when a young woman, but later changed her mind as a result of a Christian experience of some kind. Those who spoke of this did not know her well enough to say whether it had been a born-again experience or simply a different understanding of theology.

Miers had the support of feminists when she ran for office first in the Dallas bar and later when she became the first woman president of the Texas Bar Association, even though the feminists were aware she was anti-choice.

At that time, the far more conservative TBA was at odds with the American Bar Association and sometimes threatened to withdraw from the national organization. Miers was considered a moderate in that she did not want to withdraw from the ABA, but favored a proposal to change the organization's stance from support for abortion rights to a position of neutrality.

One of Miers' key backers was Louise Raggio, a much-revered Dallas feminist lawyer. The women lawyers groups favored Miers despite her stand on abortion because she was a candidate acceptable to the Establishment, thus making her electable as a woman.

Miers sometimes took women judicial candidates through her very prestigious firm Liddell, Sapp for the obligatory meet 'n' greet and even donated to Democratic candidates. Both these behaviors were well within the conventions of Dallas city and judicial politics, particularly in the 1980s. Dallas city politics are nonpartisan, and rather like Texas tea ("sweet or un?") come in only two flavors -- Establishment or less Establishment. Miers qualifies as ur-Establishment, despite "being a girl," as few of the old dinosaurs still put it. The slightly feminist tinge to her credentials is a plus, but she is quite definitely anti-abortion.

She ran for city council in 1989 as a moderate, but struggled during her interview with the lesbian/gay coalition. (At the time, it would have been considered progressive to even show up.) The Dallas Police Department did not then hire gays or lesbians, and when asked about the policy, Miers replied the department should hire the best-qualified people, the classic political sidestep answer.

When pressed, she said she did believe one should be able to legally discriminate against gays, and it is the recollection of two of the organization's officers that the response involved her religious beliefs.

Miers' church states on its website that it believes in biblical inerrancy, full immersion baptism, original sin and salvation dependent entirely upon accepting Jesus Christ. Everyone else is going to hell.

I have said for years about people in public life, "I don't write about sex, drugs or rock 'n' roll." If I had my druthers, I wouldn't write about the religion of those in public life, either, as I consider it a most private matter. Separation of church and state is in the Constitution because this country was founded by people who had experienced both religious persecution and state-supported religions. I think John F. Kennedy's 1960 statement to the Baptist ministers should stand as a model of how public servants should handle the relation between religious belief and public service.

Nevertheless, we are now beset by people who insist on dragging religion into governance -- and who themselves believe they are beset by people determined to "drive God from the public square."

This division has been in part created by and certainly aggravated by those seeking political advantage. It is a recipe for an incredibly damaging and serious split in this country, and I believe we all need to think long and carefully before doing anything to make it worse.

As an 1803 quote attributed to James Madison goes: "The purpose of separation of church and state is to keep forever from these shores the ceaseless strife that has soaked the soil of Europe with blood for centuries."

(c) 2005 Creators Syndicate


URL: http://www.workingforchange.com/arti...m?ItemID=19701

[DavidMn]

Originally Posted by dissention

She opposed the decriminalization of anti-sodomy laws. She's also anti-choice, having attended a great number of anti-choice fundraisers.

The reason she was chosen was because she's not a known nutbag like Priscilla Owen. She's a nutbag without the record to show it and nominating her was a masterful move. She's only being accused of not being conservative enough so that she comes across as a moderate, thus making any fillibuster attempt look very bad for the Democrats.

The real question I have is who was THE one behind the Miers pick?

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by DavidMn

The real question I have is who was THE one behind the Miers pick?

Who do you think? The man who essentially wipes W's a$$ after he ****tes - Karl Rove.