[ohioWfan]

She's just not ready for prime time, she's just not qualified enough.

Like Rehnquist?

I'm sorry, but this 'crony' thing doesn't hold any water at all. They know each other. He trusts her. That gives me even more confidence in his choice.

He's pro-life. She's pro-life. He doesn't want a judge to legislate from the bench. Neither does she.

He's done exactly what he's said he would do.

[Don'tMessWithTexas]

Presidents typically select their friends for AG, not SCOTUS. The Court is too important to do this.

[counterpunch]

Like Rehnquist?

Yes, like Rehnquist.
I don't think Rehnquist was particularly suitable at the time of his choosing. However, by picking a crony, Nixon did get someone who would reliably decide in a way that closely matched Nixon's own politics.

Don't get me wrong, I believe Rehnquist made a fine jurist, though I think Reagan should have put Scalia directly in the Chief Justice seat. Rehnquist's refusal to retire even on his deathbed was undignified, to say the least.

I do believe that Miers will probably turn out for Bush how Rehnquist was for Nixon: a reliable vote. And in many ways, Bush is actually making the safest, most un-Souter-like pick. But this isn't about the future of the court itself right now, we just don't know enough to discuss that. We're still just in the thick of the politics of it, and on that front, Miers was a poor choice. That base is anything but excited, and she is fairly undistinguished. A lot of good people were passed over for this pick.

Regarding how she will change the court, we just don't know, and can't know. People have a way of changing when they suddenly find themselves on the bench instead of before it. Miers could drift more and more left in practice, once on the Court. Someone like Luttig would not, he's quite set in his judicial philosophy and temperament through actual court experience.