More Miers

By

I am a child of the fifties. Before the recent firestorm of the Harriet Miers nomination I had experienced two episodes of sweeping disillusionment.
 
The first related to the assassination of President Kennedy— not his death — but the creation of the Warren Commission. I had been given wonderful middle—American schooling in civics, and I bought it all, the melting pot, the joys of freedom, and especially the equality under the law of all citizens. I cannot describe the shock, the disillusionment I felt as a teenager, when the investigation of the murder of one very famous citizen was handed over to a council of 'distinguished' elders, the Warren Commission, who packed away the evidence not to be released until everyone who had a brain left was dead. I watched every civic teacher, 'honored' journalist, friend and relative turn into zombies who agreed for the sake of all that is something or other, we will ignore the legal process and cede unlimited powers  to a 'distinguished' commission. Who elected them? I believe that willingness to invent a new legal system on the fly was a major corruption. More shocking was how alone I was in my opinion. I still feel alone.
 
The second disillusionment unfolded over some years. It was the unmasking of the 'distinguished' journalists by the alternate media to reveal frauds, toadies and self important ideologues. This was hard for me. Our family life centered around delicious moments, Walter Cronkite guiding us into new worlds, Bill Moyers sharing insights on the intelligentsia, and how to pronounce their names, taking a cup of tea and coffeecake to snuggle in with the Sunday morning news journals on television. All so important and so entertaining. But recent years have worn thin the veneer, and the alter media was there to reveal the warts. Under the pressure of political failure, I guess, the great journalist clique let their guard down, and one by one revealed themselves to be, in my eyes, phonies. At the point I began to ask myself why did I ever respect this crowd as great truth seeking men of honor, a sad, sad reality was revealed: I believed they were great journalists because they had told me they were great journalists. They introduced their friends to me as 'great and honored journalists' and their friends returned the favor. What a moment of disillusionment. I had revered them because they had told me they were to be revered. The disillusionment is in myself as much as in them.
 
And so I retreated to my sanctuary, the world of the sane and pragmatic icons of the Right. There were people who also revered the Founders and the Foundation of this country. Then came the nomination of Harriet Miers and  the cover was blown away like ducks at a shooting gallery. The nomination surprised me too, but Bush's Rose Garden press conference gave me enough information to know that he was acting within the law, that the woman was not a total idiot, and not a mediocrity. Bush was back. And he was acting completely within his mandate — uh— the one written down in the Constitution of the United States, not that other mystery mandate requiring a council of wise elders.
 
Yet the quacking got louder. George Will took off his mask to let me know that Bush had not the IQ nor temperament to choose a President! According to Wills, only select Ivory Tower types are sufficiently evolved to understand the Constitution. Say what? I didn't notice 'consultation with law professors' in the Constitution. So it went with Coulter, Krauthammer, Bork etc, etc. A council of wise law professors. Who elected these bums?  The only talent they share in common is the ugly snobbery of a total fool. What shall I call this crowd? Ivy—Heads?
 
The constitution is straight forward. It was written by a pack o' home—schoolers. The brilliance is you do not have to be a genius to understand it.  The authors built the best possible system to allow man the greatest expression of free will possible (see: Bible) within constraints based upon man's limitless ability to sin (see: Bible) using their collective experiences as men who had tasted freedom (see: Colonist) and their shared respect for the God of Abraham (see: Bible). While I agree it requires a reasonable intelligence to vet laws for constitutionality, having read the arguments of the Ivy—Heads I have no confidence in their possessing the minimum intelligence to vet a Chihuahua much less a nominee.
 
I feel so alone. They can call Bush stupid. I'll put my lot in with him. Yes, I should have known. All people are fallible. Still, I thought because they revered the rule book they actually followed it. Back to Bible for me. I need a boost.
 
Marilyn Wolgat, Taylor Michigan   10 10 05

I am a child of the fifties. Before the recent firestorm of the Harriet Miers nomination I had experienced two episodes of sweeping disillusionment.
 
The first related to the assassination of President Kennedy— not his death — but the creation of the Warren Commission. I had been given wonderful middle—American schooling in civics, and I bought it all, the melting pot, the joys of freedom, and especially the equality under the law of all citizens. I cannot describe the shock, the disillusionment I felt as a teenager, when the investigation of the murder of one very famous citizen was handed over to a council of 'distinguished' elders, the Warren Commission, who packed away the evidence not to be released until everyone who had a brain left was dead. I watched every civic teacher, 'honored' journalist, friend and relative turn into zombies who agreed for the sake of all that is something or other, we will ignore the legal process and cede unlimited powers  to a 'distinguished' commission. Who elected them? I believe that willingness to invent a new legal system on the fly was a major corruption. More shocking was how alone I was in my opinion. I still feel alone.
 
The second disillusionment unfolded over some years. It was the unmasking of the 'distinguished' journalists by the alternate media to reveal frauds, toadies and self important ideologues. This was hard for me. Our family life centered around delicious moments, Walter Cronkite guiding us into new worlds, Bill Moyers sharing insights on the intelligentsia, and how to pronounce their names, taking a cup of tea and coffeecake to snuggle in with the Sunday morning news journals on television. All so important and so entertaining. But recent years have worn thin the veneer, and the alter media was there to reveal the warts. Under the pressure of political failure, I guess, the great journalist clique let their guard down, and one by one revealed themselves to be, in my eyes, phonies. At the point I began to ask myself why did I ever respect this crowd as great truth seeking men of honor, a sad, sad reality was revealed: I believed they were great journalists because they had told me they were great journalists. They introduced their friends to me as 'great and honored journalists' and their friends returned the favor. What a moment of disillusionment. I had revered them because they had told me they were to be revered. The disillusionment is in myself as much as in them.
 
And so I retreated to my sanctuary, the world of the sane and pragmatic icons of the Right. There were people who also revered the Founders and the Foundation of this country. Then came the nomination of Harriet Miers and  the cover was blown away like ducks at a shooting gallery. The nomination surprised me too, but Bush's Rose Garden press conference gave me enough information to know that he was acting within the law, that the woman was not a total idiot, and not a mediocrity. Bush was back. And he was acting completely within his mandate — uh— the one written down in the Constitution of the United States, not that other mystery mandate requiring a council of wise elders.
 
Yet the quacking got louder. George Will took off his mask to let me know that Bush had not the IQ nor temperament to choose a President! According to Wills, only select Ivory Tower types are sufficiently evolved to understand the Constitution. Say what? I didn't notice 'consultation with law professors' in the Constitution. So it went with Coulter, Krauthammer, Bork etc, etc. A council of wise law professors. Who elected these bums?  The only talent they share in common is the ugly snobbery of a total fool. What shall I call this crowd? Ivy—Heads?
 
The constitution is straight forward. It was written by a pack o' home—schoolers. The brilliance is you do not have to be a genius to understand it.  The authors built the best possible system to allow man the greatest expression of free will possible (see: Bible) within constraints based upon man's limitless ability to sin (see: Bible) using their collective experiences as men who had tasted freedom (see: Colonist) and their shared respect for the God of Abraham (see: Bible). While I agree it requires a reasonable intelligence to vet laws for constitutionality, having read the arguments of the Ivy—Heads I have no confidence in their possessing the minimum intelligence to vet a Chihuahua much less a nominee.
 
I feel so alone. They can call Bush stupid. I'll put my lot in with him. Yes, I should have known. All people are fallible. Still, I thought because they revered the rule book they actually followed it. Back to Bible for me. I need a boost.
 
Marilyn Wolgat, Taylor Michigan   10 10 05