Miers criticism is merit-based, not gender-based

Though there are sexist elements in the Harriet Miers firestorm, the fundamental problem is her resume. She’s done a lot, but she hasn’t done a lot of the things that prepare a lawyer to sit on the highest court in the land. So it was disappointing that first lady Laura Bush went for the gender angle on Tuesday’s “Today” show, when Matt Lauer asked her whether sexism was playing a role in the criticism of Miers. “It’s possible. I think that’s possible. . . . I think people are not looking at her accomplishments.” Oh, but they are, and they don’t seem reassuring or relevant. Part of wanting to see women take their rightful places in public life is knowing when their gender is beside the point.
Posted by Rhonda Holman

6 Comments

  1. TRACY
    Posted October 11, 2005 at 2:42 pm | Permalink

    Gender is beside the point.She’s got real balls thinking she’s the best candidate for this position.

  2. Joe Williams
    Posted October 11, 2005 at 7:30 pm | Permalink

    We should be beyond the “first woman at this and at that” stuff now. It should be all about merit, not that you were the first or some pioneer in the legal profession.

  3. Damoon
    Posted October 11, 2005 at 9:38 pm | Permalink

    Tracy, What’s scary is that the president thinks she’s the best candidate for the job. I guess we shouldn’t be surprised, given his track record of awarding political favors to his friends. He doesn’t even care how obvious it is.

  4. Jed
    Posted October 11, 2005 at 11:20 pm | Permalink

    As far as I can tell, her main qualification has to be that file full of Bush family skeletons she’s got tucked away. That ought to qualify her for just about any appointment she’d ask for!

  5. TRACY
    Posted October 12, 2005 at 6:29 am | Permalink

    If Harriet crashes and burns, maybe Cindy can get Bobby nominated.

  6. Jed
    Posted October 12, 2005 at 2:16 pm | Permalink

    Bush just announced that he nominated Miers because she belonged to a church that is “universally pro-life.” She’s a one-issue nominee, with the sole assignment of overturning Roe v. Wade, outlawing abortion in all cases, and the Constitution be damned! Surely we expect more from a Supreme Court nominee!