Harriet the Fall
It really surprises me that I haven’t heard this before. The news is old so I’m probably not being original, but I thought it was worth posting.
Bush never intended Harriet Myers to sit on the Supreme Court. Since spring, he knew he’d get the chance to appoint two Supreme Court Justices, and he knew he’d have a tough time getting a hardcore conservative on there.
What does Bush gain by nominating Myers and then allowing her to withdraw?
- The appearance that he personally is not stubborn on ideology.
- A practical mandate to nominate someone more conservative.
- Dems in Congress who are more willing to compromise on the next one, since they’ve been seen to score a minor victory in tearing her apart.
After “defeating” Myers, it’s almost impossible for the Democrats to filibuster Alito… they’d look extremely uncooperative since they just “got their way” — Bush responded to all their criticism about Myers’s lack of experience by appointing someone very experienced.
This is why conservative pundits, when asked “What the hell was Bush thinking?” just talk nonsense about “his advisors… out of touch… didn’t realize… mumble mumble.” He was thinking political strategy, but that’s not something you can admit to publicly (setting up an old friend for a fall). Rove should’ve told them a better excuse to use beforehand.
I think Bush underestimated the credibility hit he would take personally, or the traction lefties would manage to give to “cronyism” (which, btw is out of all proportion). But even considering that, it was probably worth it for him.