I take a certain amount of pride in my role in fighting Harriet Miers' nomination to the Supreme Court:
- "Professor Bainbridge -- the blog and the man -- were on the forefront in criticizing the Harriet Miers nomination. In fact, in reading his blog and the responses to it during that time, I would say he was of material importance in making the conservative case against her. It's impossible to say whether her nomination have gone forward without him. But he was a strong, respected, and demonstrably conservative voice that would accept nothing less than her withdrawal." (Prawfblawg)
- "Steve Bainbridge seems to be taking new ground for bloggers. I’m not aware of many other instances of a moonlighting (in this case, lawprof) blogger who has moved into the forefront of a public debate simply through the force of his opinions – that is, without having some blockbuster factual disclosure, or some other hook. But that’s just what’s happening with Steve, who is emerging as a central voice on the Miers nomination ...." (Ribstein)
- "Hugh Hewitt, who early on insulted those center-right bloggers not in lockstep with his obsequious cheerleading of President Bush's choice to replace Sanda Day O'Conners' seat on the SCOTUS, seems a tad mean-spirited in regretting now having supported one of his brilliant blogging disciples -- Professor Bainbridge -- who has had the audacity this week to display a mind of his own in the point/counterpoint test of wills over Harriet Miers' qualifications to return the majority vote of the United States Supreme Court to the strict constructionism of Scalia-Thomas." (Certain Slant)
In addition to being a highlight of my blogging career, it was the straw that broke this particular camel's back when it came to George Bush. It was the moment I shifted from reluctant and disgruntled supporter to hater.
So I was interested to learn from Jan Crawford's report that former President Bush learned nothing from that episode. He still doesn't seem to realize just how seriously he pissed off his base:
In his new book "Decision Points," former President George W. Bush offers some fascinating tidbits about what could be his most lasting legacy: the nominations of Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court.
Along the way, he also takes time to sling a few arrows at conservatives who opposed his choice of White House Counsel Harriet Miers to replace Justice Sandra Day O'Connor. Conservatives, he says, were condescending (he refers specifically to a quote from Ann Coulter) and elitist in their opposition to Miers, and he's clearly still peeved by the revolt that led to her withdrawal. In fact, that's why he regrets nominating her.
"While I know Harriet would have made a fine justice, I didn't think enough about how the selection would be perceived by others," Mr. Bush writes. "I put my friend in an impossible situation. If I had to do it over again, I would not have thrown Harriet to the wolves of Washington."
Stuff and nonsense. It wasn't the wolves of Washington that stopped Miers. The GOP establishment would have gone along if it hadn't been for a grass roots rebellion. It was the base that bucked first. Only after the base blew up did the establishment turn on Miers. Indeed, establishment figures like Hewitt kept their lips firmly attached to Bush's butt on this issue (as with so much else) to the very end.
Bush didn't get it then and he still doesn't get it now. But does that come as a surprise?
