Bush Picks Stealth Candidate for the Supreme Court

Updates:

Paul Deigen at Info Theory doesn't like the choice either.

Marvin Olasky at Worldmagblog has an interesting series of seven posts about Miers, in which he explores her beliefs as a Christian. Here’s the first one. Check out the main site for the remainder of the series. [HT: Tim Ellsworth] I've published a portion of Olasky's interview that is related to abortion here.

Noted pro-life leader Fr. Frank Pavone (Priest's for Life) "thanked President Bush this morning for nominating a replacement for Justice Sandra Day O'Connor in a timely manner, and called upon the Senate to do its work in an expeditious way as well."

Concerned Women for America (CWA) expressed guarded optimism in response to President Bush's nomination of Harriet Miers as successor to Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor.

Rev. Patrick J. Mahoney, Director of the Christian Defense Coalition, states, "The Christian Defense Coalition is very concerned about the nomination of Harriet Miers. We are troubled that the President would put forward someone without a record, someone we know little about. Scalia and Thomas are the standard, and at this time it is difficult to say that Miers will meet that standard. We will begin the process of examining her statements to see if she is one who will honor God, the Constitution, and our nation's founding principles."

CommonWealth Conservative comments:

I’ll tell you this: I want to see more about Miers, but what I have seen so far makes me sick to my stomach. As a friend of mine said, if runaway spending, a medicare prescription bill that just might bankrupt us, No Child Left Behind, and a host of other burdens expanding government weren’t enough, now we can be sure that President George W. Bush is no conservative.

ConfirmThem notes (HT: BrokenMasterPieces):

We’ve got a lot to learn about SCOTUS nominee Harriet Miers. To hear the White House tell us, “With her distinguished career and extensive community involvement, Ms. Miers would bring a wealth of personal experience and diversity to the Supreme Court.”

Diversity. Sure she does. In fact, she gives money to Republicans *and* Democrats. [Washington Post has more]

Mr. President, you’ve got some explaining to do. And please remember - we’ve been defending you these five years because of this moment.

I can't help but feel a little uncomfortable ... I'm looking for the "bright side".

Not surprising, Operation Rescue opposes Miers' nomination in a recent press release:

While many pro-life groups were frustrated with the lack of information about the abortion stand of Bush’s first Supreme Court nominee, John Roberts, even less is known about Harriet Miers. Some have placed her in the same category as pro-abortion administration officials Condoleezza Rice and Karen Hughes.

"We must reject the nomination of Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court of the United States," said Operation Rescue President Troy Newman.

Michelle Malkin cuts to the chase:It's

not just that Miers has zero judicial experience. It's that she's so transparently a crony/"diversity" pick while so many other vastly more qualified and impressive candidates went to waste. If this is President Bush's bright idea to buck up his sagging popularity--among conservatives as well as the nation at large--one wonders whom he would have picked in rosier times. Shudder.

My initial reaction is the following: pro-abortion liberals will have successfully bullied a Republican President, backed by a Republican Senate majority, to compromise the principles they claimed to uphold when elected to office. Why not nominate someone who is forthrightly conservative, pro-life and as a matter of public record holds to the principles the Bush administration holds so dear? Bush has missed a rare and historic opportunity to correct judicial tyranny.

La Shawn Barber weighs in - she is not very optimistic.

For more see: Supreme Court Blog Aggregator