Bush's nomination was totally irresponsible-Katrina taught him nothing

[deacon]

Bush appointed Mike Brown, a totally unqualified person to head FEMA. He eventually flew down to NOLA 7 times to witness the devastation.

He acknowledged a partial responsibility at the federal level, and he saw and knows the ramifications of hiring an incompetent.

So what does he do? He nominates Miers. Same as Brown, a political insider with deep loyalty and no experience for the USSC.

He learned nothing, and it remains we have an incompetent that appoints incompetents.

[RC]

1. You do not understand. Mike Brown did exactly what he was hired to do.

Get the Democrat voting blacks out of New Orleans. One, it would turn New Orleans from Blue to Red and two, so their lands could be easier confiscated for the coming casinos and high rise hotels. Also the criminals in the White House want to turn over FEMA'a responsibilities to private enterprise, i.e., Halliburton or Brown & Root.

[onenote]

2. equating Brown and Miers --false analogy

Brown was a hack. He never accomplished a damn thing in any position he ever held. As a lawyer, he was a washout--when his firm downsized he was the first to go. As head of the Horse Assn he got himself mired in litigation. He relied entirely on contacts for his entire career.

While I haven't a clue as to what Miers' position is on the important issues that will come before the SCOTUS or much of anything else about her, and while I'm not at all optimistic that she'll be "moderate" as a justice, isn't comparable to Brown and claiming that she is gives her defenders an easy time of rebutting us. She is an accomplished attorney of more than 30 years experience who was the first woman hired by her firm, first woman to head the Texas Bar, became the managing partner of a firm of more than 400 lawyers, has been named as one of the 100 most influential attorneys in the country. Did she get her appointment to the SCOTUS because she was tight with Chimpy? Of course. But that doesn't equate her with Brown anymore than it equates Abe Fortas or Byron White (who got their nominations to the SCOTUS from LBJ and JFK because of their being tight with those Presidents) with Brown.

Making claims that allow the other side to emphasize her record of achievement hardly helps our case.

onenote

[DemonFighterLives]

3. Do we know whether her last jobs were not the result of cronyism?

Just asking, because so far any of dubyas picks, from his cabinet on have been bad for the country. Brown sucked and I assume that Miers will suck as well. The loyals to dubco are to be feared.
:freak:

[onenote]

4. I assume her "last jobs" were the result of her impressing chimpy

He's easily impressed of course. But, seriously, I suspect she did a good job representing him and so he elevated her to higher positions. Again, I regard "cronyism" as involving the appointment of people who are unqualified to positions simply because of who they know. I have no reason to suspect Ms. Miers was not qualified for the jobs she's gotten in the WH. Her "qualifications" to be a S CT justice are harder to assess at this point since we know very little about her. On a purely consitutional level, she's qualified since there are no minimum requirements to be a SCOTUS justice. Measured against other SCOTUS nominees of the twentieth century, she's probably closer to the bottom than the top, but I don't know that she's completely "unqualified."

onenote

[DemonFighterLives]

5. Like the righties keep touting her running a team of 400 lawyers

I thought the righties hated lawyers. I also would like to hear from some of those lawyers on what they think of her. No doubt she is smart and a workaholic, but if her works are to enable the "brilliant" dubby, then I don't like her. We could go back to dubby being in office illegally and therefore should not be appointing anyone.