Crying "elitist" in the context of this issue is vaguely amusing. Our Declaration, Constitution, and Bill of Rights were drafted by elites who were selected by elites who elected by elites.
They were only "elite" in the achievements, not in the breeding or background. They were lawyers and merchants. Farmers and soldiers. They were in the positions they were in because they had the guts and the lung power to stand up and take a stand, at the risk to "their lives, their fortunes and their sacred honor." And the word 'fortunes' does not mean they were all wealthy men. Instead it is in the sense of their well being.
Harriet Miers may have achieved more than Robert Bork, despite his academic credintials, by breaking down barriers in the profession that Bork served in. I think she is every bit as qualified as he is, and doesn't carry any of the arrogance and unfounded feelings of superiority that the self appointed intelligentsia have brought to the court. All of the current members of the court are "qualified" in the same sense Robert Bork is.
Right or left, the overeducated academics are the source of the problems we face with an over reaching court. I'm becoming convinced that Harriet Miers is the perfect pick precisely because she does discomfort those crying about her "lack of qualifications."
"Crying "elitist" in the context of this issue is vaguely amusing. Our Declaration, Constitution, and Bill of Rights were drafted by elites who were selected by elites who elected by elites."
Thank you. More than you'll ever know.