[ez]

OK, I need to understand this better. I would like either nephi, or one of the other anti-Miers posters on here to summarize for me the content of the conversations W. had with the Gang of 14 and other Senators that led him to believe he would better served nominating Miers instead of a "known" conservative, and why he's wrong.

Otherwise, I'll assume they have no friggin clue.

[Nephi]

You're asking Allen H, whose convoluted logic for supporting Miers is essentially because Bush, the Nixon Republican, couldn't count on the liberal wing of the senate to go to battle with him on a Luttig, JRB, Edith Clement or Michael McConnell, (jurists the Christian right hoped for,) he had to settle for an unknown, (who is known for her Christianity) and now, it is the secularists that are opposing her nomination that was made to make the Christian conservatives happy who aren't happy with her nomination afterall, to explain someone else's view?

This should be fun.

[Allen H]

Let me save you the trouble. They have no friggin clue.