Breaking News: Miers Withdraws Nomination



24 Comments so far

  1. Jim Fryer (unregistered) on October 27th, 2005 @ 9:06 am

    Bush’s contempt for the Supreme Court, his ignorance of how it functions and his indifference to the consequences of his actions on the future of the Republican Party (after all, apres moi le deluge)suggest that he will go for another nonentity.

    Miers’ nomination was an off-handed lob to the carniverous base. Been there, done that now. (They were so ungrateful anyway). Now he can nominate someone more credible, at least by his dim lights. A real candidate might even let him appear statesman-like.

    It will, of course, be harder now to find someone not stained by the spreading scandals (Teapot Dome, anyone?)

    In fact, it might be impossible.

    To know this White House is to be made dirty.

  2. nikkos (unregistered) on October 27th, 2005 @ 9:13 am

    It’s funny you mention Teapot Dome (here’s a Wiki on it for anyone in need of a refresher: because what strikes me when I go back and think about it is how, in light of today’s corruption, it’s so quaint.

    You know things are bad when old fashioned corruption starts to look like the “good old days” compared to what we’re saddled with at present.

  3. sean (unregistered) on October 27th, 2005 @ 9:18 am

    Isn’t this the fundamental weakness of a system where judges are appointed by politicians? And as such are vunerable to the charge that they are there as channels for Presidential influence if the candidate is weak enough not to be of their own mind?

  4. nikkos (unregistered) on October 27th, 2005 @ 9:25 am

    An interesting comment from Sean, from across the pond.

    My opinion is that the system is set up in such a way as to punish any politican that chooses to nominate a crony. This is a case in point.

    True cronies being nominated to the Supreme Court are rare (Abe Fortas for example) because most politicans recognize that doing so is fatal to the nominee, and to their own political aspirations. Not this President.

    His consistent and insistent disregard for reality is finally biting him in the ass, be it in regards to Supreme Court nominees, Iraq, disasters, etc.

  5. Tom Bridge (unregistered) on October 27th, 2005 @ 9:40 am

    What’s this got to do w/ Chicago, though?

  6. nikkos (unregistered) on October 27th, 2005 @ 9:46 am

    Are you serious?

    Ummm, let’s see, since the Supreme Court interprets the laws of the land as set forth in the Constitution, the judges that sit on the court are making decisions that affect every citizen of these United States- even here in Chicago.

  7. nikkos (unregistered) on October 27th, 2005 @ 10:09 am

    Fixed the link to the Wiki on Teapot Dome:

  8. sean (unregistered) on October 27th, 2005 @ 10:09 am

    The flipside is our system, which yours was in some way built to avoid. In ours the judiciary are independent of the government and are appointed by their peers. However, alot of judges in the past have come a cropper when there background (mostly elite schools such as Harrow, Eton and Westminster) have hardly equiped them for life in the world the rest of exist in. The appopintment of SCJs affects indirectly myself and others as long as the US has the ability and inclintaion to project its culture and influence worldwide for good or bad.

  9. nikkos (unregistered) on October 27th, 2005 @ 10:17 am

    Sean, good point, I wasn’t aware of how judges were selected in the UK. I suppose neither system is without its flaws. I don’t think that in the U.S. the populace would allow for judges to be chosen by other judges- just too clubby for our taste. it’s been said that in England, the populace will not tolerate sex scandals (although they are titillated by them), that in France, the voters will not tolerate financial scandals and that in the U.S. what really gets our goat are abuses of power- of which cronyism is but one permutation.

    As for your point that you too will be effected by the US Supreme Court’s decisions- agreed. It does strike me as telling that you recognize this yet some of my fellow citizens wonder what this has to do with Chicago!

  10. sean (unregistered) on October 27th, 2005 @ 10:24 am

    French voters I thought saw sex scandals as a rite of er….passage if you will. It proved a politician could stand & deliver (maybe with the help of le viagra bien sur).

  11. Tom Bridge (unregistered) on October 27th, 2005 @ 10:27 am

    She’d affect us here in DC, too, but I figure we’ve got better things to do than talk about national politics, which ends up being divisive and an audience turnoff :)

  12. nikkos (unregistered) on October 27th, 2005 @ 10:32 am

    Sean, right on, ha hahaha!

    Tom, again, are you serious? You live in D.C. yet avoid political discussion because they are “divisive”? Give me a fucking break. Better yet, get a fucking clue.

    Feel free to post whatever you like at the DC blog, but don’t tell me what I can and cannot post here.

    And DEFINITELY don’t tell me that politics are out of bounds because they are an audience turn-off- methinks the slew of comments attached to several of the politically oriented posts on this blog disprove that contention.

    These are the exactly the kinds of conversations we as Americans should be having. It is only by kicking around the issues that we can make choices that move the country forward. You appear to be unclear on the concept of representative democracy.

  13. sean (unregistered) on October 27th, 2005 @ 10:46 am

    My feeling is that how anyone can be surprised Bush did what he did. All along he has rewarded the loyal, but possibly ethically challenged. The FEMA debacle is a case in point. On other matters after seeing the Yankees play in late September I’m really happy that the Sox won. Are there any fans left who remember the 1917 win?

  14. Tom Bridge (unregistered) on October 27th, 2005 @ 10:46 am

    Yeah, but are they appropriate for the blog? I dunno. If Miers was a Chicago native, I could see the angle. We talk about a lot of politics on the DC blog, recently covering the fracas regarding our cockamamie DUI laws in DC (you could be arrested with a .00 BAC), but really, I don’t get what this has to do with life in Chicago.

    Don’t you guys have a world champion baseball team for the first time since 1917?

  15. nikkos (unregistered) on October 27th, 2005 @ 10:54 am

    Tom, I made my point as to why this appropriate. If you don’t get it, that’s not my problem.

    If you wanna have a debate about what is/not appropriate to post to the blog, let’s have it via the author’s or personal e-mail. This post is not about you and your editorial sense.

  16. Gabe (unregistered) on October 28th, 2005 @ 11:34 am

    **Quote: This post is not about you and your editorial sense. /Quote

    You’re right. It’s about having a liberal bitch fest.

    “Oh, Bush is such an idiot. He caused hurricane Katrina and he’s the reason I have a bad haircut.”

    Would you like some cheese with that whine? You’re gonna sit there and tell me that Dems haven’t promoted cronies as well? It’s fine if democrats do it but not republicans. Talk about hypocritical.

  17. Marty (unregistered) on October 28th, 2005 @ 5:07 pm

    Liberal bitch fest? Please.

    We’ve been critical about Daley and his cronieism since this blog’s inception. I’ve even commented about it–with Daley, at least he keeps things working. Bush’s cronieism and patronage has cost us 2,000 american lives. This most recent attempt at patronage, ie Miers, is a threat to the rights and liberties of all Americans.

    This is not a bitch fest dear reader; this is a chicago based political discussion.

    Politics in Chicago is as full contact as rugby. If you can’t handle it, especially with lame cliches, then stay out of the comments.

  18. nikkos (unregistered) on October 31st, 2005 @ 9:09 am

    It’s Alito…developing…

  19. Gabe (unregistered) on November 1st, 2005 @ 12:32 pm

    “Politics in Chicago is as full contact as rugby. If you can’t handle it, especially with lame cliches, then stay out of the comments.”

    Read some of my other posts. You’ll note that I’ve gone toe-to-toe with people like Nikkos in here. So save your “cliches” and insults for your chicago political friends. Just because I offer a different view and point out your hypocracy is no reason to get snooty. Just accept it and move on.

    “This is not a bitch fest dear reader; this is a chicago based political discussion.”

    And how many times have there been posts in here for what the republicans have done right? Read your own blog dear sir and you will find that there is none. You may be right in saying this is a “Chicago based political discussion” but it is a one-sided chicago-based political discussion. I’m simply trying to point out the inconsistency and provide some other viewpoints.

    “Bush’s cronieism and patronage has cost us 2,000 american lives.”

    I would ask for further explanation on this one. That’s a pretty big leap there. Are you also gonna say that he cost us 3,000 lives at the WTC on 9/11 too? What about the Oklahoma bombing? Or the US embassy in Kenya? Was that his fault too? When do you start taking responsibility for your own actions and stop blaming others?

    “This most recent attempt at patronage, ie Miers, is a threat to the rights and liberties of all Americans.”

    Give me a break. Now who’s using scare tactics.

  20. nikkos (unregistered) on November 1st, 2005 @ 12:41 pm


    All snark aside, I suggest you start your own blog. You seem to have a POV you wish to share. Rather than having to react to our posts, you would be free to set your own agenda.

    You appear upset that this blog does not often laud Republicans. This will not change until Republicans do something worth my praise.

    Until then, however, you may cheer the Republicans all you want in your own forum.

  21. Gabe (unregistered) on November 1st, 2005 @ 12:48 pm

    (No Snark included) Point taken and I would agree to an extent. How about you add me to this blog as a chance to provide that “other side of the coin”?

    I have expressed my opinion on other forums but never taken it to that level. I would be honored to accept your nomination. hehe ;)

  22. nikkos (unregistered) on November 1st, 2005 @ 12:55 pm

    Well, it would certainly make our meetups more interesting, now wouldn’t it?

  23. Gabe (unregistered) on November 1st, 2005 @ 1:18 pm

    Can I watch Goonies with you guys? I’ll bring the Chardonnay or shiraz. :)

  24. Marty (unregistered) on November 3rd, 2005 @ 2:18 pm

    I’m working on a response to the earlier comment Gabe; it seems that net news wire doesn’t always update for new comments.

    I was thinking that it’d be a new blog. You post, we comment. Hell, we all post and comment.

Terms of use | Privacy Policy | Content: Creative Commons | Site and Design © 2009 | Metroblogging ® and Metblogs ® are registered trademarks of Bode Media, Inc.