Rosa, Harriet, and the silence of the Dems
Democratic Senators, usually a mouthy bunch, have been silent on the Harriet Miers debacle for two main reasons.
The first is the pleasure in watching the Republican snipping, whining, and name-calling. But even more fun (because, really, watching Republicans go red in the face is only fun for so long), are the Meirs spinoffs--Slate's Miers-O-Meter, for example, or the wonderful, earnest, and excitable Harriet Meirs's Blog!!!, which today begins the "Withdraw Withdraw Miers campaign," citing the following reason (among others):
Harriet Miers is the only nominee we've got, so "love the one your with." The Supreme Court can't exist if there aren't Justices on it. This is really two reasons.Perhaps the Dems are too busy laughing to come up with a coherent position on the Supreme Cout nominee.
The second and more problematic reason that the Dems have been so quiet is that it's hard to think of who Bush would possibly nominate that would be any better. If Meirs withdraws, we're more likely to get a Michael Luttig instead of a Michael Ratner. In other words, we'll get someone as conservative, if not more so, than Miers, but with more duck-and-weave legal savvy and that vague thing called "credentials."
Mourning Rosa Parks today I realized how differently I would feel about the direction of this country if we had someone like her sitting on the Supreme Court. She had plenty of direct experience with our legal system. She had a long public record of fairness, thoughtfulness, and clear thinking. Throughout her life, she worked hard and exhibited compassion, dignity, and intelligence.
I know, Rosa's gone now, and there's no way Bush will honor her legacy by nominating, say, Eva Jefferson Patterson to the Supreme Cout. But I can still dream. Isn't that where it all begins?