I disagree with Hugh Hewitt to a large degree on the Harriet Miers nomination to the Supreme Court. I base my support for Miers on a wish to avoid a destructive party schism that will threaten our hold on one or both houses of Congress next year, a loss which we cannot afford during the war on terror. Realistically speaking, Miers will probably be a disappointment but is unlikely to be another Souter or even a Kennedy. Her defeat does not outweigh coughing up Congress.

Disagreement, however, only goes so far:

"Shill," "toady," "kool-aid drinker," and --yes-- W's "Joe Conason" --the unkindest cut of all-- have all been attributed to me by colleagues on the center-right. Actually, there are even worse descriptions, but I maintain a PG blog. Fine, all around. Let fly, friends, you owe me nothing except your candid opinions. But you might owe the president more.

I disagree with Hugh here as well. Many of us owe Hugh a lot more than our candid opinions, and we damned well know it. He doesn't demand an oath of obedience for the helping hand he's extended to so many of us in the blogosphere, nor should we feel obliged to give one, but at least we should credit Hugh for the integrity he's so often demonstrated. Hugh doesn't shill or toady for anyone.

I think Hugh has unwarranted faith in the purported brilliance of the Miers nomination, and his unrelentingly positive analysis keeps many from resigning themselves to the reality that we will have to live with what essentially is a blunder and a wasted opportunity. But I don't doubt for a moment that the analysis is his honest opinion and represents his true beliefs. Integrity and honesty are among Hugh's enduring qualities, which his friends should remember.

Hugh may well turn out to be dead right, dead wrong, or somewhere in between on Miers, as may I or my friends Michelle Malkin or The Anchoress. However we may disagree, we will remain friends because in the end we trust each other to give our honest opinions and credit each other with having our own minds on issues.

After the Miers kerfuffle has long gone, we will still have each other, people. Let's try to remember that and not burn all our bridges. Let's remember who our friends are.

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry is

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Can We Remember Who Our Friends Are?:

» Consigliere Harriet Miers 'The Originalist' Part II from All Things Beautiful
Corbis Images 'Harriet Miers in the Oval office with President Bush July 2005' Let's start by outlining the explanations, courtesy of Darlene Superville @ Law.com, on some of the confusing terms of the moment, surrounding the 'Outside the Judicial Mona... [Read More]

Tracked on October 7, 2005 12:15 AM

» Consigliere Harriet Miers 'The Originalist' Part II from All Things Beautiful
I now have to go back to my stand alone ally on the Miers issue, Hugh Hewitt, and look at what the evidence of the separation in the troops has damaged thus far: "Now the complaints have all been aired, and everyone has put their marker down. Continuin... [Read More]

Tracked on October 7, 2005 12:23 AM

» Consigliere Harriet Miers 'The Originalist' Part I from All Things Beautiful
I agree with Hugh Hewitt. Conviction driven, gutsy decisions like this nomination, deserve respect and the benefit of the doubt, which the Bloggosphere has almost unanimously denied the President. Ed Morrissey update: " I would urge all of us to reflec... [Read More]

Tracked on October 7, 2005 12:46 AM

» Some thoughts on the Harriet Miers kerfuffle from Small Town Veteran
So far I've been sitting back watching without saying anything about the Harriet Miers nomination, but I guess it's time to put my thoughts on the record. Were there more obviously qualified candidates available? Yes, there were. Does that mean [Read More]

Tracked on October 7, 2005 2:41 AM

» Roundup: Miers bad for everyone? from The Anchoress
Deborah Orin says the Miers nomination is bad for Democrats. Dr. Thomas Sowell thinks her stealth gives Democrats a break, and suggests - as others have - that her nomination has less to do with President Bush betraying the base, but more to do with ... [Read More]

Tracked on October 7, 2005 11:32 AM

» Should Miers be Defeated? from http://aggressiveconservative.blogspot.com/
The question facing all conservatives doubtful of President Bush's selection of Miers to the Supreme Court is: should we work towards defeating her? Several prominent columnists are saying YES to this question... [Read More]

Tracked on October 7, 2005 12:00 PM