CommunityPam's House Blend

'Jeff Gannon' on Miers

Jeff in the good old Bulldog days. And today.

I deigned to sully my keyboard by surfing over to the former White House rent-boy-cum-journalist’s blog to see if the self-appointed “Voice of New Media” is still opining, and lo and behold, he weighs in on Miers in the post A Stealthy Court Pick. He has nothing to say about her positions re: gay civil rights while running for city council back in 1989. Interesting, no?

Conservatives are up in arms because Miers does not have a known judicial philosophy. She is not one of the judges that the Right views as the payoff for supporting Bush for another term. They wanted another Antonin Scalia or Clarence Thomas. Pricilla Owen and Janice Rogers Brown were favorites of the movement conservatives because their views are well known. They’ve been gearing up for this fight for a long time, to avenge Robert Bork and compensate for David Souter.

Rush Limbaugh said that the pick was made “out of weakness.” Bill Kristol said he was “disappointed, demoralized.” Ann Coulter called Miers a “complete mediocrity.”

I have to confess I wanted a nominee that would be the “stick in the eye” that Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid warned the President would trigger a filibuster. Like most conservatives, I have grown weary of how the Democrats continue to assert their relevance in governance when voters have removed them from power and reduced their numbers in three successive elections.

When you peel away the top layer of beltway bloviation, the brilliant strategy becomes easier to see. Bush has worked closely with Miers for over a decade and knows her philosophy. Conservative critics point to her campaign contributions to Democrats in Texas in 1988 as some indication that she might have liberal tendencies. That may trouble some, but I am encouraged, since I know that a convert to a cause seems to adopt its principles with greater fervor than those who come to it naturally.

The Freepers had a bit to say about Gannon and his comments in this piece…

Actual Freeper Quotes™

“Does anyone really believe Harry Reid would have urged Bush to nominate her if he thought there was only a snowball’s chance in hell of her even inching the SCOTUS rightward? Stealthy candidate for some, perhaps; but not for Reid, I fear.”

“I think Harry Reid got played. Now he’s stuck with it.”

“This is true. I wonder how many understand how and why this turned out this way. Harry got played, but he also got “consulted.” LOL!!!”

“You mean Bush tricked Reid into urging Bush to nominate Miers? I wonder how he did that? I doubt Bush told Reid she’d make a fine conservative judge. Reid wouldn’t be too enthusiastic about that. So maybe the conversation was more along the lines of, “Hey, Harry. I’ll tell everyone she’s a conservative; but, to tell you the truth, she’s just another Darth Ginsburg. It’ll be our little secret, ‘kay?””

“Reid thought she was one of Sappho’s daughters?”

“An indication of her stance on gay rights comes from this questionaire from the Lesbian/Gay Political Coalition of Dallas Miers filled out while running for the Dallas City Council in 1989. In it, she supported full civil rights for gays and lesbians and backed AIDS education programs for the city of Dallas. (Source:”

“OK, I read it–what am I not supposed to be worried about again??”

“Glad you posted this. I was waiting to see the gay escort view on the pick.”

“Wait, I’m confused. Are we still listening to what Jeff Gannon thinks? I think that’s a bad sign, frankly, to even be paying attention to such a discredited and immoral person. Isn’t there any better commentary out there to link to? This is disappointing.”

“I support civil rights for homosexuals! However, I in no way agree with their lifestyle. In fact, I support civil rights for adulterers too! Whatever, started AIDS is now a moot point, it is a social disease that requires public funding. Remember Bush’s $15 billion to Africa for AIDS? Guess what, that was public funding!”

“Now “special rights”, the kind created by activist judges, I believe should never be supported. I made my choice last November and remember, we could be talking about a Kerry nominee named Mitchell, or something fun like that, today.”

“I agree with you–I didn’t even read the header article. I had just seen the Drudge headline and wanted to comment, so I chose the newest thread. I think this Gannon character is a liability. We are lucky that situation didn’t get very ugly. Could have been that there was no there, there, but those photos! Yeesh! I was afraid he might have a “contact” in the WH.”

“I think what alleged conservatives are doing is shameful. What you are doing is requiring is a litmus test that you have used to criticize democrats for the last twenty years. This president promised conservative nominees; he’s delivered for over 5 years; and he’s earned the right to nominate whomever he wishes that is qualified–at least that’s what you were saying a month ago about Roberts. Y’all think he’s going to blow his chance to change the direction of the court on this nominee? I think not. What he has done is brilliant in political reality, a nominee where no one can require a litmus test.”

Also see: Make your own Jeffy Lube pro-war rally poster

Previous post

Next post

Back to the subject of "outing"

Pam Spaulding

Pam Spaulding