The Difference between Borking and Getting Miered

The gang at NRO’s The Corner has come up with the multiple meanings of “Getting Miered”:

1. Good —

To put your own allies in the most untenable position possible based upon exceptionally bad decsion making.

2. Better —

While steadlily going in reverse in the driveway of your own home, intentionally abruptly pressing gas pedal as to crash into garage door for no apparent reason.

3. Best —

Getting used to everyone hating you except your core supporters and thinking what the hell, it’d be cool to see what it’s like to have everyone hate you at same time.

Advertisements

9 thoughts on “The Difference between Borking and Getting Miered

  1. I think the NRO crowd perverts the analogy by shifting the blame:

    to get Borked—to be unscrupulously torpedoed by an opponent

    to get Miered—unscrupulously torpedoed by an ally

    to Mier—whining about getting what you want but not the way you want it

  2. What I find ironic about this is that the D’s are now in the catbird seat. They hold the balance of power to tube Miers or get her confirmed.

    What are they going to do? Will they bargain for some concessions with the Admin?

    Interesting choices they have

  3. Nothing unscrupulous about it, Tom. There’s a track record with regard to the S. Ct. that fully warrants skepticism.

  4. Skepticism is fine, altho I’m not quite sure of which track record you’re speaking of.

    But who do Miss Peggy, et al., think they are, demanding the president withdraw Miz Miers?

    I mean, Borking your own seems a violation of Reagan’s 11th Commandment, or something.

  5. It’s not borking. No one has attempted to distort her record. She is not accused of anything other than of not being up to the standard many expect and being far from the best card we could play. It’s a tragedy that she has to stand in the middle of this thing like a human shield. I continually regret that there is a person suffering in the middle of what is really an argument about a standard.

  6. Just out of curiosity, when did Bork become a hero?

    My recollections at the time (showing my age here) are that 1) Bork still had the baggage of being the triggerman in the midnight massacre 2) Bork was pugnaciously rightest and 3) D’s cut a deal never to nominate Larry Tribe if Bork was withdrawn.

    To me the law is a beautiful and logical entity. I’m always amazed at how good law is so intrinsically logically consistent. Bad law comes from disliking the outcome that the law leads to, so it’s twisted to meet the outcome that is preferred. That is policy-making from the bench and it happens as much from the right as the left.

  7. Connie, I argued a few months ago in this forum that reason 1) was what killed Bork. I agree with your philosophy of law. You should go for Scalia. He fully agrees.

  8. Actions speak louder than words, Hunter, and Scalia has shown himself to be a rank hypocrite whenever he disagrees with the outcome of the law.

  9. Connie, I argued a few months ago in this forum that reason 1) was what killed Bork. I agree with your philosophy of law. You should go for Scalia. He fully agrees.

    Actions speak louder than words, Hunter, and Scalia has shown himself to be a rank hypocrite whenever he disagrees with the outcome of the law.

    I agree with both of these. Scalia’s dissent on the Guantanmo Bay detainees regarding the failure of Bush to suspend writ of habeas corpus was really good. I also read a case the other day on whether the police could hold persons arrested without a warrant until it was convenient to take them before a Magistrate where Scalia wrote a good dissent.

    His dissent on the Texas sodomy law was pretty weird, though. I think he has problems when his interpretation of the law conflicts with his religious principles.

    The founding fathers did write the Bill of rights and the 4th amendment. Freedom from unreasonable searches and seizures isn’t hard to strictly construe, Patriot Act aside.

Comments are closed.