Keep digging

Is something in the water at the White House?  They're just digging the hole deeper with the Miers nomination.  When you get a mainstream news outlet calling them on something like this, you know they're in trouble.  CNN: White House defends talk of Miers' religion.

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Bush suggested Wednesday that Harriet Miers' evangelical Christian beliefs were part of the reason he nominated her to the Supreme Court. But later a White House spokesman said her religion played no role in her selection.

"People are interested to know why I picked Harriet Miers," Bush told reporters at the White House. "They want to know Harriet Miers' background. They want to know as much as they possibly can before they form opinions."

"Part of Harriet Miers' life is her religion," Bush said during Oval Office comments with visiting Polish President Aleksander Kwasniewski. "Part of it has to do with the fact that she was a pioneer woman and a trailblazer in the law in Texas."[...]

Later Wednesday, White House press secretary Scott McClellan denied Miers' religious beliefs had anything to do with her nomination.

"Harriet Miers is a person of faith," McClellan told reporters. "She recognizes, however, that a person's religion or personal views have no role when it comes to making decisions as a judge."

Surely the White House has thinking of ways to placate a base and conservative punditry in rebellion, but if this how they're going to do it (i.e., by claiming to have picked her for illegal reasons), it doesn't seem to be helping them. 

Almost makes me wonder whether they're trying to shift the story away from Miers' (un)qualifications and general mediocrity to a religion thing -- and whether press stories exposing contradictory White House talking points are part of that.  See, we told you that the liberal, elitist, secularist, baby-killing media hates evangelicals.  That kind of thing. 

But that strategy strikes me as unlikely, since I can't help but think that Bush actually wants to see her confirmed.  And in coming dangerously close to talk of a "religious test," Bush isn't winning any fans with a (D) next to their name.

-- Michael

Comments

[Cheryl]

The thing i am wondering about is, how many United Statians give a shit either way who Bush appoints to the court or why. It seems that most of the people I talk with on a daily basis have little interest and even less of a clue what is going on. It is as if the corporate media have successfully discouraged the majority from participating and now from even caring about who represents our republic.

So if busche crime co. wants to shred the constitution, abolish habeus corpus and appoint religious fanatics to the court, what consequences are there? Yes politically they are digging a hole, and legally they are digging a hole, but the true test is if there are any consequences they must endure for what they are doing. So far I see that nothing gets in the way of the plan. Even illegal wars and mismanaged environmental catastrophes seem to roll off their backs like floodwater.

I give Miers 50/50 odds of being confirmed to the court.

[Malcolm]

As someone on FauxNews noted Bushco seems to be trying to bait the Dems and the Left into a vicious attack on Miers with this kind of talk to rally the Republican base.

[Incertus]

Well, it seems the Dems aren't rising to the bait then, and why should they? We've got more than enough of a case to vote against her based simply on cronyism. Makes me wonder if that talking head actually believes that Democrats are nothing but a bunch of god-hating liberals.

[gary]

And today, DeLay started to whine about a judge that gave money to MoveOn.org.

It's not that they hate activist judges in the GOP.

They just only want a particular RIGHT WING NUT JOB variety!

Hypocrits!