The Facts: Miers Nomination

The first, one-stop shop for info about the Supreme Court nomination and confirmation process is washingtonpost.com's Campaign for the Court blog, which has been indispensible these last few months. Also useful is this fact sheet from nationmaster.com providing basics about Miers. Nationmaster has recently added another page dedicated to her nomination and confirmation process.

For brief biographical info and links to what few documents there are that might offer some clues about this enigmatic nominee, the Post's Miers dossier is invaluable. About.com also offers a collection of Harriet Miers info (not all necessarily nonpatisan, however.) And the Left Coaster, though a partisan source, lists the documentation for its Miers-related facts, so you can go check them out as you please.

Finally, for some general Supreme Court reference materials, see the Facts post from the Roberts nomination.

(What's not a good source of facts? The Harriet Miers blog. Has a couple amusing entries, though.)

By Emily Messner |  October 5, 2005; 7:30 PM ET  | Category:  Facts
Previous: Global Warming: What's Next? | Next: This Week's Debate: The Harriet Miers Nomination

Comments

Please email us to report offensive comments.



Emily,

We need another juicy topic. Something to tantalize our taste buds between the main course of Miers Tartare. :-) Something not too sweet, or salty, just right.

The Valerie Plume investigation; the FEMA fiasco; the spy scandal that's brewing (both the Marine and the agent that sold secrets to the Israelis). The menu is long and many spicy dishes are included. :-)

BTW, the SCOTUS blog is superb!

SandyK

Posted by: SandyK | October 6, 2005 09:42 AM

Revisiting this blog thread.

Seems Bush also has some ideas to check the Catholic side of the SCOTUS...

http://www.nationmaster.com/encyclopedia/Restoration-Movement

Interesting. Is it that he fears the Catholic Church and it's reach, or is it to be ready if the GOP falls, to fend off a possible religious bloodbath? Or, worse, he picked a fundie more incline to convert others under hardship than most?

Some creeds of her new religion...

===========================================
1. Christianity should not be divided, Christ intended the creation of one church.

2. Creeds divide, but Christians should be able to find agreement by standing on the Bible itself (from which all creeds are human expansions or constrictions) instead of on the opinions of men about the Bible.

3. Ecclesiastical traditions divide, but Christians should be able to find common ground by following the practice (as best as it can be determined) of the early church.

4. Names of human origin divide, but Christians should be able to find common ground by using biblical names for the church (i.e., "Christian Church" or "Church of Christ" as opposed to "Methodist" or "Lutheran", etc.). It is in this vein that conservative members of the Churches of Christ object to the phrase "Stone-Campbell Movement".
===========================================

If you can't get to non-believers through the front door and invited inside (waiting from a Bram Stoker fan to offer a joke there ;) ), try the backdoor with stealth.

Good choice on the religious side. But Bush has to face the Baptists and Catholics, though (who are very unforgiving with their views on JC and the scripture). This can also explain the divide among the Religious Right over Miers too -- she didn't come from a mainline church (i.e., she's no Catholic, Methodist or Baptist but comes from some movement, like the Mormons).

If it wasn't for their abuses and outright murders, I'd find the Christian sects duking it off among themselves public entertainment. For they all believe they either know God, or believe he spoke to only their kind, only to find out even God won't settle their dispute (maybe because He's disgusted in what Mankind has done to Him altogether -- like putting words in His mouth, and justify a special relationship to him solely on one's religion).

SandyK
A proud Deist

Posted by: SandyK | October 8, 2005 05:40 AM

Post a Comment

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.