How Are Miers And Castro Alike? How Are They Different?

1. They're both lapsed Catholics who demonstrate the old saw about rejecting an absurdity that's logical and coherent in favor of an absurdity that's illogical and incoherent.

2. The Supreme Court hopeful was once an abortion foe but has now had her opinion on Roe v. Wade disappeared through the Eternal Sunshine magic of the nomination process. El Jefe has moved in the opposite direction, and is calling on his old enemies for help:

Fidel Castro wants help from the Church to fight the "plague of abortion" in his country, reported an Italian cardinal at the end of a visit with the Cuban president.

Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, archbishop of Genoa, spoke of his trip in an interview with the Italian newspaper La Stampa, published Thursday.

"Fidel Castro is asking us for help to combat the plague of abortion in Cuba," he said.

"The spread of abortion, as Fidel Castro emphasized, is among the causes of the country's demographic crisis," the cardinal added. "And it is also a consequence of the plague of sexual tourism.

Assuming the Cardinal is telling the truth (and you should never assume a Cardinal is telling the truth), it would be pretty pathetic if the Cuban dictator is more straightforward in his view than a Supreme Court nominee. Are we really going to see a confirmation hearing where everybody has to pretend Miers' opinion on this matter has suddenly become some big mystery? If she thinks Roe v. Wade is a bad decision (and as a point of law, she could certainly argue that it is), then she should say so. If she's got a religious calling to outlaw abortion, she should say that too. Her personal savior was very specific on this issue.

Comments

[linguist]

I have to say, these are two people I wouldn't have thought to compare and contrast.

[Umbriel]

One could argue that her support for a constitutional amendment banning abortion is a sign of her belief that Roe v. Wade was good law, such that only an amendment could affect a ban.

I have no idea whether that is true in her case.

[MikeP]

As much as I think Miers' nomination is a slap in the face of everyone on the planet, there is no logical inconsistency in her position.

If I were asked whether I think there should be a constitutional amendment saying, "Congress shall not have the power to set up Post Offices," I'd say yes. But if a case which hinged on that power appeared before a court on which I sat, I would judge the case consistent with that being a rightful power of Congress.

Just as Roberts said during his nomination hearings that his personal beliefs would not color his legal rulings...

I do know this: that my faith and my religious beliefs do not play a role in judging. When it comes to judging, I look to the law books and always have. I don't look to the Bible or any other religious source.

...that's what we need to hear from Miers at a bare minimum.

Of course, her scant political trail and absent judicial trail certainly don't make it easy to believe anything she might say.

...

Okay, I give in. Put me on the bandwagon that says if a nominee has no history on which to hang a confirmation decision, she does not get the same allowance to evade questions that might come before the court. If she doesn't answer, she doesn't get confirmed.

[RA]

Ruth Bader Godzilla didn't answer how she would rule on Roe v Wade. Everyone who didn't grow up in a closet knew how she would vote. No one fused about that. This is the typical double standard. One standard for liberals and a different harsher standard for conservatives.

All you abortionist conservatives out there who are trying to mau mau Miers for her originalist view on Roe better think twice. If Bush doesn't nominate ALL anti-Roe judges, a large chunk of the pro-life vote will walk away from the Republican party. I will be leading the shunning. See how much power Republicans will hold without the pro-lifers.

Keep promoting the American holocaust by unconstitutional judicial fiat and America deserves to be ruled by liberals.

[rationalvoice]

RA,

Do what you need to do. Anything to remove the Republicans from power is justified if you are a patriot. They have done so much damage to America it is not clear that we ever will be able to recover.

[Isaac Bartram]

...a large chunk of the pro-life vote will walk away from the Republican party.

And go where, exactly?

[Deus ex Machina]

...a large chunk of the pro-life vote will walk away from the Republican party.

And go where, exactly?

My guess: they'll stay at home on election day and pray for a Kucinich victory to rile their supporters.

[R C Dean]

All you abortionist conservatives out there who are trying to mau mau Miers for her originalist view on Roe better think twice.

Assumming that she will vote against Roe, I have no basis whatsoever she will do so on "originalist" grounds.

And that's the problem. Its not entirely about how she will vote on Roe, its why she will do so and what that means for all the other hundreds of cases she will cast votes on.

Believe it or not, for some of us this is bigger than Roe.

[Xboy]

But what did the Yankees scout say about her pitching?

[crimethink]

Isaac Bartram,

They don't have to go anywhere, they just have to stay home, not donate money, and not volunteer for party activities. By burning every other segment of their base (ie fiscal conservatives, libertarians, etc), Republicans have put all their eggs in one basket. And this nomination could be the jolt that overturns the basket...

[MJ]

Do either Miers or Castro fit the definition of "lapsed Catholic"? Perhaps I'm wrong about this, but I thought a lapsed Catholic was one who slid into apathy about their religion, not someone who outright rejected the Catholic faith (as Miers did when she became an evangelical, and Cstro did when he embraced communism).

[JD]

I wonder if any lefties' heads exploded when they found out Castro is anti-abortion. Knowing them, they probably just claimed the US made him do it.