<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN"> <HTML><HEAD> <META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1"> <META content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.2722" name=GENERATOR> <STYLE></STYLE> </HEAD> <BODY bgColor=#ffffff> <DIV>----- Original Message ----- </DIV> <DIV><B>From:</B> <A title=srobin21@comcast.net href="mailto:srobin21@comcast.net">Steven L. Robinson</A> </DIV> <DIV>-But this leaves unanswered the question of WHY. Miers may not be qualified to </DIV> <DIV>-sit on the SC, but from all appearances she can be counted on to vote with </DIV> <DIV>-'Scalia and Thomas.on all the important issues.  So why would folks like Coulter care?  </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Because first it's embarassing-- embarassing because of the reek of cronyism but even more so because it's a seeming acknowledgement that rightwing legal views are unpopular and cannot only be enacted by appointing stealth nominees.</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>What the rightwing wants is someone to stand up and say, Roe v. Wade is an abomination and deserves to be overturned and Congressional powers are narrow and should be far more limited.  And they want the Senate to vote and endorse that nominee, thereby legitmizing the rightward lurch by the Court.</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Legitimacy matters in the broader politics of the nation but it also matters for the politics of the Court.   Remember, even if Roberts and Miers are both solid anti-Roe votes, there are still five votes for Roe v. Wade, including Kennedy who upheld it in the Casey decision.    But if a frankly anti-Roe nominee was confirmed by the Senate, I could see Kennedy switching his vote to overturn Roe, arguing such a position reflected changing values in the country as shown by the confirmation decision.  </FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>But aside from the specifics of results, I return to the embarrassment factor.  Conservatives hate the term "compassionate conservative" as if the real thing is something to be ashamed of and hate the idea that all of their top standard bearers in the legal world would be an embarassment if nominated for the Supreme Court.</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Nathan</FONT></DIV> <DIV><BR></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV> <DIV>-------------- Original message -------------- <BR><BR><BR>>  If Ann Coulter is writing stuff like this rant and this mirrors a <BR>> conservative movement that is fracturing, then perhaps now would be a <BR>> good time for the American left to put the Bush-bashing on hold and <BR>> instead be more vocal about things WE want. ... <BR>> <BR>> Chuck <BR>> ___________________________________ <BR>> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk </DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"> <P> <HR> <P></P>___________________________________<BR>http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk</BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>