It's either feast or famine at the White House with the Harriet Miers nomination. Given the chance to lay out a positive, substantial case for her nomination to the Supreme Court, the Bush administration has remained largely silent. However, given an opportunity to smear the base that elected them, the administration has seized practically every opportunity to do so. The latest comes from the normally classy First Lady, who again promoted Ed Gillespie's barnburner accusation of sexism among the ranks of conservatives:

Joining her husband in defense of Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers, Laura Bush today called her a "role model for young women around the country" and suggested that sexism was a "possible" reason for the heavy criticism of the nomination.

"I know Harriet well," the first lady said. "I know how accomplished she is. I know how many times she's broken the glass ceiling. . . . She's very deliberate and thoughtful and will bring dignity to wherever she goes, certainly the Supreme Court." ...

Asked by host Matt Lauer if sexism might be playing a role in the Miers controversy, she said, "It's possible. I think that's possible. . . . I think people are not looking at her accomplishments."

Perhaps people haven't looked at her accomplishments because this White House has been completely inept at promoting them. We have heard about her work in cleaning up the Texas Lottery Commission, her status as the first woman to lead the Texas Bar Association, and her leadership as the managing partner of a large Texas law firm. Given that conservatives generally don't trust trial lawyers and the Bar Association and are at best ambivalent to government sponsorship of gambling, those sound rather weak as arguments for a nomination to the Supreme Court. If Miers has other accomplishments that indicate why conservatives should trust Bush in her nomination, we've yet to hear that from the White House.

Instead, we get attacked for our supposed "sexism", which does more to marginalize conservatives than anything the Democrats have done over the past twenty years -- and it's so demonstrably false that one wonders if the President has decided to torch his party out of a fit of pique. After all, it wasn't our decision to treat the O'Connor seat as a quota fulfillment; that seems to have originated with the First Lady herself, a form of sexism all its own.

Besides, conservatives stood ready to enthusiastically support a number of women for this nomination:

* Janice Rogers Brown has a long run of state Supreme Court experience, got re-elected to her position with 78% of the vote in California, and has written brilliantly and often on constitutional issues. She is tough, erudite, and more than a match for the fools on the Judiciary Committee, and would also have made minced meat out of any arguments about a "privileged upbringing", one of the snide commentaries about John Roberts in the last round.

* Edith Hollan Jones has served on the federal bench for years, compiling a record of constructionist opinions. She is younger and more experienced than Miers, and has been on conservative short lists for years.

* Priscilla Owen has a record similar to Brown's on the Texas bench and has demonstrated patience and judicial temperament that would easily impress the American people to the detriment of the opposition on the Judiciary Committee.

* Want a woman who litigates rather than one from the bench? One could do worse than Maureen Mahoney, who has argued over a dozen cases at the Supreme Court, clerked for Rehnquist who also later named her as Chair of the Supreme Court Fellows Commission, has been recognized as one of the top 50 female litigators by National Law Journal, and even worked on the transition team in 2000-1 for George Bush.

How does endorsing that slate of candidates equate to sexism in opposition to the unremarkable Miers? It doesn't, but as with those practiced in the victimization smear, the facts really don't matter at all. This kind of argument we expect from the Barbara Boxers and the Ted Kennedys, not from a Republican White House.

It's enough to start making me think that we need to send a clearer message to George Bush. The White House needs to rethink its relationship to reality and its so-far loyal supporters.

UPDATE: Michelle Malkin notices this, too.

UPDATE II: Dafydd ab Hugh at Big Lizards thinks we were misled by the Post's reporting. He has a transcript that tends to support that -- but to me, it hardly seems like she's disassociating herself from that "possibility", either. Let's not forget that the same White House sent Ed Gillespie out with this same message just a few days ago.

After Gillespie made that accusation, the White House has had ample time to disavow his statement. So far, I haven't seen a retraction or an apology. I'm not prepared to give them the benefit of the doubt at this point.

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry is

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference White House Pours More Gasoline On The Fire (Updated):

» Miers Rants from Wilson Fu
Hmmm, I do not know if anything I have written rises to the level of rant, but I have read some that have. Calling people “idiots” for questioning the Miers selection, and telling people to “SHUT THE F*** UP!” are not argument... [Read More]

Tracked on October 11, 2005 2:44 PM

» A Kick To The Nads From A Very Nice Lady from Hard Starboard
via Newsmax: First Lady Laura Bush said Tuesday that some of the criticism of her husband's Supreme Court nominee, Harriet Miers, could be driven by sexism. Asked by NBC Today Show host Matt Lauer if sexism was behind the attacks on Miers, Mrs.... [Read More]

Tracked on October 11, 2005 2:50 PM

» More on Miers from Around the Blogosphere from Everyman Chronicles
Well, the sentiment coming from the GOP and other Miers supporters is to "trust the President." It seems to me, that in a case where an individual is nominated to the highest court in the land, the words "trust the President" shouldn't even be a consid... [Read More]

Tracked on October 11, 2005 2:54 PM

» The Sexism Card from Hyscience
The First lady chose to use it for the defense of U.S. Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers."That's possible, I think that's possible," Mrs. Bush said when asked on NBC's "Today Show" whether criticism that Miers lacked intellectual heft were sexist... [Read More]

Tracked on October 11, 2005 3:01 PM

» Preferring another potential nominee is not “sexist” from The Unalienable Right
We must begin by saying that, like so many Americans, we really love and admire Laura Bush. But this line that “it’s possible” that sexism is playing a role in the opposition to the nomination of Harriet Miers is just plain insulting... [Read More]

Tracked on October 11, 2005 4:12 PM

» The First Lady’s Bully Pulpit from Rightank.com
Today, in defense of Harriet Miers nomination, First Lady Laura Bush stepped out and said that the lynch mob conservatives who oppose Miers ascension to the Supreme Court are possibly a bunch of sexists. Captain Ed on Captain’s Quarters respond... [Read More]

Tracked on October 11, 2005 4:14 PM

» No, She Didn't from Big Lizards
This post is not about Harriet Miers; she is merely background. Rather, I rise as a gentleman to defend the besmirched honor of the First Lady. Despite the newest charge sweeping the blogosphere, Laura Bush did not call Miers opponents "sexist." [Read More]

Tracked on October 11, 2005 7:44 PM

» Conservatives, Hold Your Fire! from Donkey Stomp
Conservatives have been battling it out in regards to Supreme Court nominee, Harriet Miers. The battle has been heated as Republicans debate rather or not Miers is fit for the job. However, some of the "debates" are getting ugly. This... [Read More]

Tracked on October 11, 2005 7:52 PM

» Hypocrisy, Or Opening the Door? from Wallo World
E.J. Dionne, Jr. is concerned about what he contends is the hypocrisy of faith-based advocates who suggest that Harriet Miers’ strong religious faith can be a a barometer of her legal views, when they vocally objected to such discussions in the ... [Read More]

Tracked on October 11, 2005 8:17 PM

» The Laura Bush "It's Possible" Controversy from Sister Toldjah
A huge deal has been made today over supposed 'controversial' comments First Lady Laura Bush made in response to a question Matt Lauer from the "Today" show asked her. Relevant part of the transcript: [Read More]

Tracked on October 11, 2005 9:36 PM

» The Laura Bush “It’s Possible” Controversy from California Conservative
A huge deal has been made today over supposed ‘controversial’ comments First Lady Laura Bush made in response to a question Matt Lauer from the “Today” show asked her. Relevant part of the transcript: Lauer: Some are suggesti... [Read More]

Tracked on October 11, 2005 9:40 PM

» Blogland Quote Of The Day - Harriet Miers Edition from Joust The Facts
From Ed Morrissey at Captain's Quarters, in discussing the Bush administration's ineptitude in presenting and promoting Harriet Miers for SCOTUS:Perhaps people haven't looked at her accomplishments because this White House has been completely inept at ... [Read More]

Tracked on October 11, 2005 10:00 PM

» The Daily Queeg-Mier from The Politburo Diktat
Let’s start with Captain Ed, writing about Laura Bush’s “possible sexism” comment (or mis-quote, if you prefer). Given an opportunity to smear the base that elected them, the administration has seized practically every opportu... [Read More]

Tracked on October 11, 2005 10:52 PM

» Have conservatives lost their minds? from Media Lies
It would appear so. Many of them have fallen for the story of Laura Bush claiming that sexism is involved in the opposition to Miers. T... [Read More]

Tracked on October 11, 2005 11:15 PM

» Still more thoughts on the Harriet Miers kerfuffle from Small Town Veteran
(Continued from More thoughts on the Harriet Miers kerfuffle) Michelle Malkin has another good quote and link roundup here. Dafydd ab Hugh says Captain Ed's Washington Post piece overlooked a significant portion of the electorate: Cowboys, and follows ... [Read More]

Tracked on October 12, 2005 12:13 AM

» The definition depends upon the target from Random Fate
From Captain’s Quarters: It’s either feast or famine at the White House with the Harriet Miers nomination. Given the chance to lay out a positive, substantial case for her nomination to the Supreme Court, the Bush administration has remai... [Read More]

Tracked on October 12, 2005 12:58 AM

» Malkin In The Middle from Don Surber
There's another factor here, and it concerns us more than a stressed-out blogger. It's the fact that Captain's Quarters, another highly-trafficked blog, is also sticking by the story despite the fact there's nothing there. Is this a case of two big blo... [Read More]

Tracked on October 12, 2005 1:09 AM

» The First Lady and Professor Althouse from All Things Beautiful
Much contoversy has been placed yesterday on Laura Bush's stepping into the front line of defence of Harriet Miers, her husband's nominee for a Supreme Court vacancy. Speaking during a rare joint interview together with the President, on the NBC's Toda... [Read More]

Tracked on October 12, 2005 6:19 AM

» The First Lady and Professor Althouse from All Things Beautiful
Much contoversy has been placed yesterday on Laura Bush's stepping into the front line of defence of Harriet Miers, her husband's nominee for a Supreme Court vacancy. Speaking during a rare joint interview together with the President, on the NBC's Toda... [Read More]

Tracked on October 12, 2005 7:26 AM

» More on the "Sexism" Charge from A Lady's Ruminations
This from the excellent Captain's Quarters: [Read More]

Tracked on October 12, 2005 1:44 PM

» '-ism' being used in place of a logical argument? from Porkopolis
The charge of sexism that some Republicans uses against those that criticize the Miers nomination sounds eerily like the charge of racism Democrats sometimes use at the drop of a hat and with little else to argue [Read More]

Tracked on October 12, 2005 2:14 PM

» Harriet Miers is Unconstitutional from damnum absque injuria
Some readers may interpret last week’s broadsides against David Frum and George Will as a backhanded endorsement of Harriet Miers’s nomination, or at least as a representation that Miers opponents are the only ones engaging stooopid argume... [Read More]

Tracked on October 12, 2005 11:29 PM

» You wouldn't like him when he's angry. from It Should Be Noted
Something tells me Professor Bainbridge is not ecstatic about Bush's latest choice for the Supreme Court. First you all go after the normally classy Laura, now you're calling Bush a drunk. It's all fun and games until Bush's next Supreme [Read More]

Tracked on October 13, 2005 10:47 AM