Sunday, October 23, 2005

Bush's politics of revelation must be stopped

It is clear that President Bush nominated Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court to be what political scientists call a gyroscope -- a deeply predictable person, animated by her own internal convictions -- to represent and satisfy Bush's pro-life base, and to rig the system in his favor. Unfortunately, a politics of religious revelation has taken over actual public discussion of Miers. "I've known Harriet for more than a decade," Bush explained while introducing Miers to the world, on Oct. 3. "I know her heart, I know her character," he added. So, Miers has been in immediate communication with Bush, as God to man. No one will deny such communication, but it seems that it has been revealed to Bush only. When he and other members of Congress tell us to trust in Bush's revelation, it is not a revelation to us who were not part of the communication, but hearsay. If we are all required to believe that Miers has a good character, then the proof and evidence of it should be equal to all, and public. Instead of this, a small number of persons are presented on TV as proxies for the whole United States to say that they know her heart and character, and all the rest of us and the Senate are called on to believe it.

This must be criticised and resisted. Persons on both the right and the left have good reasons to be worried about the revelations increasingly at the heart of Bush's appointment decisions.

9 comments:

PiedPiper said...

Great argument, but "criticised"? Why do you have to be so damn British? Freakin' lobsterbacks...

Ilya said...

And why did I say "resisted"?--that makes it sound like "they" have all the power, which is not true.

Anonymous said...

If a tree in the woods fell on the PeP...would anybody care?

xtrachromosomeconservative said...

Good question, I suspect not. But nonetheless that doesn't and shouldn't stop us from stroking our own egos in cyberspace. So there.

archduke f. f. said...

Anonymous can blow it out his unnamed ass. (How's that for intelligent discourse?)

Anonymous said...

hmm... the members of the PeP can't handle the thoughts of others in regards to their precious blog, thus cementing my belief that while they claim to want to know who their readers are, PeP writers can't handle what their readers think. I found anonymous's comment to be quite humorous.

Ilya said...

Dear anonymous,

Evidently you care enough to point out that nobody cares what we write. As they say, it's better to be looked over than overlooked.

I am, sincerely,

~Ilya, on behalf of the PeP

Aljavar said...

I thought about posting this anonymosly and saying something assy, be decided against it.

In regards to the actual post (unlike nearly all of the other comments), conservatives alike are pretty up in arms over the "pay no attention to the women about to be important" tactic. Pick up any neo-con media outlet (even the die-hard line towers) and you'll hear everyone saying pretty much the same thing. There's gotta be more revelation of her intentions and character or she's gonna drop like archduke's left nut should have when he was three.

xtrachromosomeconservative said...

We shall now see if the next nomination will be revelatory or grounded in competence and intellect.