"Harry Reid supports her, and suggested she would be acceptible. In other words, she is NOT a Scalia or Thomas."
"BS."
What a well reasoned response! you sure convinced me. Not.
On Drudge right now:
"HUMAN EVENTS: Harriet Miers contributed $250 to Clinton for President Committee on December 23, 1991, according to Federal Election Commission records. She did not contribute any money to the reelection of President Bush senior, who would face off against the Democrat Clinton in the 1992 presidential election. In 1988, Miers contributed $1,000 to the Democratic presidential primary campaign of then-Sen. Al Gore. At the time Vice President George H.W. Bush was in a Republican presidential primary fight with then-Sen. Dole and Kemp. She did not contribute to any of these Republicans.."
"On a conference call held by the Federalist Society this morning, former RNC Chairman Ed Gillespie admitted sheepishly that Miers was a Democrat througout the 1980s; asked specifically about the Gore contribution, Gillespie said that she was a 'conservative' democrat who later became a republican... Developing..."
Reid did say she was on the no-filibuster list. Why do you think that is?
"Harriet Miers contributed $250 to Clinton for President Committee on December 23, 1991"
I'll go ahead and answer for the other side since we know what they will say.
"Quit being hysterical, you idiot. Clinton was a conservative at that time. Even Reagan was a Democrat once! Trust George! He and Karl have a secret plan! They are geniuses and all of you conservative hand-wringers are fools. By denouncing this pick, you are just helping Hillary!"
If I have missed any more of the other sides potent arguments, I hope someone will fill in the blanks.....
There is no way around it. This pick is simply pathetic. Not surprising, but, even so, still pathetic.