October 24, 2005
I've kept mum until now on the Miers nomination. I was initially underwhelmed, and my estimation of Miers' adequacy for the job continues to decline.
It was bad enough that she took a swipe at the Federalist society as being too political (while claiming the NAACP wasn't). Her few writing samples are simply banal. I would love to get a hold of a few of Judge Posner's thank you notes. I bet they're considerably better-written than the "Way Cool!" cards authored by Harriet.
Part of me hopes this is a setup to make Janice Rogers Brown look stellar by comparison. If so, then Miers is truly a team player for the most brilliant man she has ever known. But I really doubt it. This President is simply not an intellectual, and this decision bears the hallmarks of a "gut call" as opposed to a well-reasoned selection process.
For further thoughts, consult Jeff Goldstein (just click and scroll), whose opinions on this matter largely reflect my own.
Also, check out the intellectual firepower on the board of advisors to the new Americans for Better Justice, which was formed by conservatives who support the President, but oppose the Miers nomination.
Posted by: JohnL at
11:02 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 215 words, total size 2 kb.
October 05, 2005
The source of the meme, Dan at Searchlight Crusade, explains his concept thus:
We've been allowing ourselves as a society to lose sight of the big stuff in amongst all the little day-to-day stuff that goes on every day, rather than keeping focused on the end result of the big projects.
Not everybody has the same list of Big Things, and most of them tend to be personal, not public or political in nature. It can be hard to keep them in sight, especially when you're thinking tactically from day to day and you need to be thinking strategically. People whose list of big things are different from one another, whether different in priority on the same items or having completely different items in the list of Big Things, are predictably going to have intractable arguments between themselves, which do not often admit of a mutually satisfactory conclusion. Nonetheless, if both sides to an argument are aware of their differences on Big Things, they are far more likely to come to an agreement to disagree more or less amicably, even if one wins the voting and the other loses.
Big Things tend to be broad based, not specific issues themselves. It is rare that one vote on one item directly resolves a Big Thing. Big Things take dedication and years of work to resolve; on a day to day basis there are victories and defeats, some more important than others but few, if any, critical to the point of being a sure overall victory or defeat.
So what are ten eight of my political "big things"? Check them out beyond the fold...
more...
Posted by: JohnL at
11:05 PM
| Comments (1)
| Add Comment
Post contains 1524 words, total size 10 kb.
21 queries taking 0.0138 seconds, 34 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
