Why Should Conservatives Trust George Bush’s Judgement On Miers?

Hugh Hewitt, whom I admire and generally agree with, is defending the abysmal Harriet Miers nomination by asking conservatives, “Do you trust (George Bush)?” Unfortunately, the reason why this nomination has caused such an uproar on the right is that the answer to that is a resounding, “No.”

Knowing what we know today, why should conservatives trust George Bush after the terrible judgement he has shown on so many issues?

It goes without saying that Bush is worse than Lyndon Johnson in the big spending department. In his entire time in the White House, he has never even vetoed a single pork laden bill. Then there’s the enormous Medicare prescription drug benefit which will create a massive expansion of government and add a trillion dollars to the debt next 15 years.

We also can’t forget the anti-First Amendment, McCain-Feingold campaign finance reform bill which Bush signed into law or Bush’s position on illegal immigration which has alienated a large chunk of the party.

Since his election in 2004, Bush has spent months senselessly flogging Social Security when almost everyone acknowledges it isn’t going anywhere. Even on the war in Iraq, an area where many conservatives agree wholeheartedly with his policies, it has been frustrating to watch Bush twiddling his thumbs instead of making a real effort to buck up public support for the war.

Now, to top it all off, Bush has picked a minimally qualified crony without solid conservative credentials for the Supreme Court because…why exactly? He knows her, she has been nice to him, and that makes her the best person to fill one of the most crucial jobs in the country?

You can try to put a good face on this decision if you like, but the very fact that so many conservatives are ripping into Bush over the Miers nomination — in and of itself — means she was a terrible selection even if Miers is really to the right of Clarence Thomas.

Bush could have selected judges like Sam “Scalito” Alito, Michael Luttig, Emilio Garza, Priscilla Owen, on and on and on, all of whom:

1) Have much more extensive track records.
2) Would have fired the base up.
3) Would have gotten confirmed.

Since that’s the case, to select someone like Harriet Miers — who will significantly hurt Bush politically — will be a big mistake even if she does turn out to be a solid conservative vote — which, by the way, is far from a given.

This was another bungled decision in what is getting to be a startlingly long line of bungled decisions and it’s entirely possible that it will cause so much political damage that the GOP will lose Senate seats in 2006 because of it. What makes Harriet Miers worth that?

Absolutely nothing that anyone other than President Bush can see.

Share this!

Enjoy reading? Share it with your friends!

Send this to friend