Ace of Spades HQ

« What does the 'A' in AP stand for? A**HOLE?! | Main | Embryos Spurred To Produce Stem Cells Without Being Destroyed »

October 17, 2005

Stealth No More: Miers Pals Vow She'll Overturn Roe

The trouble with a nominee this stealthy: to reassure conservatives, her friends have had to de-cloak her.

Mr. Dobson quelled the controversy by saying that Karl Rove, the White House's deputy chief of staff, had not given him assurances about how a Justice Miers would vote. "I would have loved to have known how Harriet Miers views Roe v. Wade," Mr. Dobson said last week. "But even if Karl had known the answer to that--and I'm certain that he didn't because the president himself said he didn't know--Karl would not have told me that. That's the most incendiary information that's out there, and it was never part of our discussion."
It might, however, have been part of another discussion. On Oct. 3, the day the Miers nomination was announced, Mr. Dobson and other religious conservatives held a conference call to discuss the nomination. One of the people on the call took extensive notes, which I have obtained. According to the notes, two of Ms. Miers's close friends--both sitting judges--said during the call that she would vote to overturn Roe.

Now she'll face even tougher scrutiny from liberals. Had she had some kind of a paper trail that showed conservative leanings, none of this would have happened.

I know: If many conservatives hadn't questioned her, this wouldn't have happened, either.

Tough call. I don't know if I buy this -- this is all second-hand stuff; who really knows what she thinks? -- and we're getting into a dicey area where some people can swear they know she's against Roe while she'll testify (probably) that she hasn't made up her mind about it yet.

Subpeonaeing Judge Hecht: A participant in the conference call, he's apparently made two contradictory statements, one that he knows based on personal information Miers will be an anti-Roe vote, two that he just can't predict what the woman will do.

Sketchy.

posted by Ace at 02:02 PM

Comments

WHOA MASTER ROVIAN PLAN!

Get Miers out there, out in front, nice lady, with Reid et al supporting.

Throw some blood in the water (R-v-W)

Get nominee voted down.....after a long, knock down drag out brawl. On national TV. Day after day.

End result- a nice sweet normal lady gets run out of the Senate on a rail.

Cue Act II- Nominate a Justice in the mold of Scalia or Thomas. Beg the Democrats to start another bloody confirmation hearing, after they just bitched and complained and rejected the last nominee.

Lord Rove laughs.

Posted by: Andy the Squirrel on October 17, 2005 02:19 PM

The question isn't whether or not she will overturn Roe, but why would she overturn Roe?
To get the job?
Because Bush told her too?
Because the explosive collar Rove planted will go off if she votes for it?
Because Jesus loves the little childrens, especially with BBQ sauce?
Or because Roe v Wade was a horrible example of legal reasoning with no basis in the Constitution?

My ultimate desire isn't to know how she would rule in Roe, but some knowledge as to how she would approach the next Kelo, or when Pres Hillary or Pres McCain starts up concentration camps for all who dare criticise them.

Posted by: HowardDevore on October 17, 2005 02:23 PM

Andy, if the scheme is to generate negative publicity by casting Meirs as the victim, a) it went horribly wrong when half the Senate Republicans started expressing grave doubts, and b) shouldn't they have picked someone who is at least marginally attractive? Most people sympathize with the good-looking a lot faster than with skeletor over there.

Howard, precisely. As much as I hate Roe v. Wade, I hate the outcome-oriented "personal politics as Constitutional reasoning" approach that gave us Roe in the first place even more. I don't want to hear what she'll do with Roe, because it's just one case out of many. I want to know why she'll do what she does, so that we can make educated guesses (as opposed to the rampant, highly inflamed stuff that's been sweeping the dextrosphere).

I want Roe gone, but I want it gone for the right reasons.

Posted by: Sobek on October 17, 2005 02:30 PM

Because the explosive collar Rove planted will go off if she votes for it?

LOL! Classic.

Posted by: someone on October 17, 2005 03:14 PM

Is anybody aware of a significant conservative bloc that embraces a "results oriented" jurisprudence? If it exists, I haven't read or heard from them. This sounds like an imaginary fear.

Posted by: VRWC Agent on October 17, 2005 05:41 PM

What about Wickard? EH???? Oh wait, the Senate will never ask about that one, because they all like it.

Posted by: The Unabrewer on October 17, 2005 07:49 PM

"Is anybody aware of a significant conservative bloc that embraces a "results oriented" jurisprudence? "

Um, yeah. There was some blog somewhere, with this thing about a retarded chicken crossing the road.

Ace something. You can find it.

-----------
When Roe v Wade is overturned, and states get to set the rules, the red vs blue myth is gonna get real. Country club repubs won't put up with it. Check the data on who has HAD abortions.

Dems win.

Poor blue states will get poorer and become greater drains on the red states.

Great, huh? Patriarchy ain't cheap.

Posted by: tubino on October 17, 2005 11:35 PM

More likely is that most states will adopt a moderate abortion policy since the bulk of the populace supports a moderate abortion policy.

Posted by: on October 18, 2005 03:39 AM

There was some blog somewhere, with this thing about a retarded chicken crossing the road.

As I recall, the chicken was voting with Scalia. Poor effort, Tubby. And while you are trying to figure out what distinguishes originalism from judicial activism, you might also want to look up the word "hyperbole."

When Roe v Wade is overturned, and states get to set the rules

You mean like the 10th Amendment says they get to do? Horrors!

So far, the whole "will of the people" thing seems to favor our side of the grand public debate. If it didn't, packing the judiciary with activists wouldn't be so important to the moonbats. We can live with the Constitution it either way, though. Just follow it.

Posted by: VRWC Agent on October 18, 2005 01:51 PM

The bunch at NOW and ACLU and well as the infamous PLANNED PARENTHOOD oppse anyone who would overturn ROE vs WADE

Posted by: spurwing plover on October 23, 2005 06:07 PM

Amazon.com Widgets

Now Available!
The Deplorable Gourmet
A Horde-sourced Cookbook
[All profits go to charity]

Top Headlines

The Reaping Phase
@AceofSpadesHQ

Funniest thing I've read about the Virginia mess. Back when they were hustling the referendum through the assembly both Senators, Warner and Kaine, advised them to go slow and play by the rules. Louise Lucas said she respected them but didn't need advice from the "cuck chair" in the corner. The gerrymandering was overturned and Louise is heading for the big house. Edward G. Robinson voice "where's your cuck now?"
Posted by: Smell the Glove

I posted his post on twitter and it's gotten 25K views so far. Thanks, Smell the Glove

Chris
@chriswithans

"Ahhhhh ahh I put my career on the line for Louise Lucas and Jay Jones thinking they'd vault me into presidential contention and we ended up costing Democrats 20 House seats and unleashing a Reverse Dobbs ahhhhh ahhh"

Forgotten 80s Mystery Click That Sums Up the Democrat Communist Party Today
Something is wrong as I hold you near
Somebody else holds your heart, yeah
You turn to me with your icy tears
And then it's raining, feels like it's raining

TJM wonders about world building in stories, mostly The Hunger Games

"It's f**king f**ked."
-- reportedly a genuine comment offered by a "senior Labour source"
Correction: I wrote that Labour is losing 88% (now 87%) of the seats it is "defending." I think that's wrong. The right way to say it is the seats they are contesting -- that is, they don't necessarily already hold these seats, but they have put up a candidate to run for the seat. It's still very bad but not as bad as losing 87% of the seats they already held.

Basil the Great
@BasilTheGreat

🚨ED MILIBAND [a Minister in Starmer's government] SAYS KEIR STARMER WILL RESIGN AS PRIME MINISTER

He has reportedly reassured Labour MP's that Starmer will be resigning following the disastrous results tonight

It's over

"The end of the two party system in the UK" as first the Fake Conservatives and now Labour chooses political suicide rather than simply STOPPING THE INVASION
Incidentally, the only reason this didn't already happen in the US is because of the Very Bad Orange Man (who is right on 85% of all policy calls and extremely, existentially right on 15% of them)

No political party that is NOT also a doomsday religious cult would EVER choose a cataclysmic loss -- and possible extinction as a party -- to support a toxically unpopular favoritism of NON-CITIZEN ILLEGAL MIGRANTS over actual citizen voters.

Only a cult does this.

Now they've lost 84%.

Annunziata Rees-Mogg
@zatzi
If this continues Labour loses 2,148 seats tonight.

That is much worse than the worst case predictions I’ve seen.

Cataclysmic

Update: They've now lost 88% of the seats they're defending. As I mentioned earlier, I think I heard that London will not bail them out, as many of those Labour seats will probably flip to "Muslim Independent" or Green. Detroit's 5am vote will not save them.

Yup, Labour is losing 80% of its seats...

The British Patriot
@TheBritLad

🚨 BREAKING: Labour have lost 80% of all seats contested as of 2:25 AM.<
br> If this continues, Keir Starmer will be out of office next week.

Reform has surged and projected to pick up between 1700-2100 seats.

Wow, up to 1700-2100 seats. It's not incredible that this is happening. It's incredible that the Davos crowd is so absolutely determined to privilege Muslim "migrants" over the actual native population who elects them, no matter how loudly the natives scream that they want to be prioritized, that they will gladly self-extinguish as a party rather than simply representing the interests of their own voters. Astonishing.
Remember, when they call other people "cultists" -- they are the ones so imprisoned in their social reinforcement and discipline bubbles that they will choose political death rather than dare upset the Karen Enforcement Officers of their cult.
Update: Now they've lost 83% of the seats they were defending.

(((Dan Hodges)))
@DPJHodges

Reform are basically wiping Labour out in the North. It's not a defeat. It's not even a rout. Labour are simply ceasing to exist.

Nick Lowles
@lowles_nick

Tonight’s results are calamitous for Labour. Not just for Keir Starmer's leadership, but for the very future of the party

STARMERGEDDON: In early returns, Reform gains 135 seats, Labour loses 90, the Fake Conservatives lose 36 (and I didn't even know they could fall any further), the Lib Dems lose 4, and the Greens gain 6. Note that the only other party gaining seats is the Greens and they're only gaining a handful of seats.
Update: Reform now up 145, Labour down 98.
Labour projected to lose Wales -- where they've ruled for 27 years.
Fulton County Georgia just discovered 400 boxes of ballots for Labour
Update: REF +156, LAB -107, CON -45
Brutal: In four out of five council seats where Labour is defending, they've lost. 80%.
I'm sure it's not this simple, but Reform is straight taking Labour's and the "Conservatives'" seats. They've lost almost exactly what Reform gained. If understand this right (and warning, I probably don't), all of London's council seats are up for election, and Labour might lose hugely there, as their old voters abandon them for Reform, Muslim Indenpendents, and the Greens.
REF +190, LAB -134, CON -56.

Updates on the Labour collapse in council elections -- which wags are calling #Starmergeddon -- from Beege Welborne. There are about 5000 seats up for grabs, Labour is expected to lose 1,800, Reform will probably gain 1,580, up from... zero. So this would be more than that.
People claim that while Labour has adopted the Sharia Agenda to appeal to the million Muslims it allowed to migrate to the country, those voters are ditching Labour to vote for the Muslim Independent Party or the Greens. Delicious. This shadenfreude is going straight to my thighs.
Oh, and if Starmer loses about as badly as expected, Labour will toss him out of a window Braveheart style and replace him. He will announce he is resigning to spend more time with his Gay Ukrainian Male Prostitutes.

Media bias and senationalism are as old as, well, the media:

That was written by Denny O'Neill and illustrated by, get this, Frank Miller. Editor to the Stars Jim Shooter was in charge at the time.
I always thought the gag was original to the comic book, but in fact the "Threat or Menace" headline was a satirical joke about media bias and sensationalism for a long while. The Harvard Lampoon used it in a parody of Life magazine: "Flying Saucers: Threat or Menace?"

Hamas is Humiliating Trump's 'Board of Peace'
[Hat Tip: TC] [CBD]

Tucker Carlson is pretty sure Trump is a wizard

Ted Turner Dies At 87 [CBD]

Podcast: Starting a new season, CBD and Sefton discuss their personal journeys to conservative principles, is Nick Shirley the beginning of a trend?, Iran trying to reignite the war, the Left attacks itself, even on "Best Guitarist" lists, and more!

TJM definitively ranks the films of Billy Wilder, like Some Like It Hot

TJM talks about Billy Wilder