"There is always a philosophy for lack of courage."—Albert Camus

Wednesday, October 12, 2005

Miered in the Slough of Despond

Hunter is sounding like a man who can't take much more of this. He's obviously not looking at the nomination through the lens of self-interest. This Miers kerfuffle is the biggest gift to hit the right-wing blogosphere since Rathergate. It's such a complete and utter disaster, there's really nothing to do but try to get some laughs and traffic out of it.

Miers is a homonym of mires.
Mire is a synonym of swamp.
Other synonyms of swamp are:
bog.
quagmire,
morass,
or
(my favorite)
dismal.
The Miers nomination is a dismal morass. QED.

If you were looking for something that was actually clever and funny, you should visit Dylan over at Still Angry, where George and Harriet are given the Mark Antony treatment and a chorus of bloggers including Bainbridge, Patterico, and Feddie from Southern Appeal play supporting roles. It is the funniest thing I've read in days, and when Dylan declaims

I come not, friends, to steal away your hearts: I am no orator, as Bush is.

my coffee went four different directions. Dylan tops himself in his own comments box, however, when he explains

I'm a Texas A&M grad with a University of Houston J.D., so I know an underqualified Texas legal hack when I see one.

Priceless.

5 comments:

Hunter Baker said...

Then Dylan and I have something in common. I'm a UH JD, too, although I hasten to add a magna cum laude UH JD. My degree was my ticket out of the corporate world into public policy. My peers spent their summers at Locke Liddell (Harriet's firm), while I went to The Rutherford Institute and Prison Fellowship for far less moolah.

Karl Spence said...

Conservatives have every right to be disappointed in the nomination of Harriet Miers, not least because it (again) ducks an open fight with Senate Democrats over judicial activism. But there’s another way — a better way — to engage liberals in that debate. It’s described at www.fairamendment.us.

A Fair Construction Amendment is an idea whose time hasn't just come -- it's long overdue. It first occurred to me as I was reading Raoul Berger’s Government By Judiciary, more than 20 years ago. I thought: Instead of arguing with liberals about Berger’s thesis, why not establish it as law, whether liberals like it or not? A friend whose opinions I respect doubts the amendment would work, since liberal Supreme Court justices would set out to subvert it, just as they’ve done with the rest of the Constitution. But if so, they’d have to do it in full sight of a people who had been alerted to the issue by the very process of the amendment’s adoption and ratification. And in that fight, the Left’s favorite weapon — “borking” judicial nominees — would be of no use. I for one would love to watch our liberal senators, activists and law professors explain to the public how Washington, Jefferson, Hamilton, Madison, Marshall, Story, Teddy Roosevelt and Cardozo are all “out of the mainstream.”

Tlaloc said...

"I for one would love to watch our liberal senators, activists and law professors explain to the public how Washington, Jefferson, Hamilton, Madison, Marshall, Story, Teddy Roosevelt and Cardozo are all “out of the mainstream.” "

You really think pointing out that Washington (for example) as a slave owning guy from the 1700s is not mainstream for 21st century America would be hard?

I have a lovely bridge to sell you...

Tom Van Dyke said...

Ouch, Kathy. That dazzling and disarming wordsmanship put me en garde that I'd stumbled unto something by Homnick, whoms work I ad-Miers.

By the time I sussed out where your punto reverso was coming from, I'd already been pierced through the heart.

James Elliott said...

whoms work I ad-Miers.

Tom, you must be killed for the good of humanity. Don't take it personally.