[Crush T Velour]

OK, I followed your link and it's pretty unconvincing, especially the part about Judge Roberts. He became a federal judge based on his accomplishments, not because of who he knew. You can't seriously believe that she would have become White House Counsel in a different President's administration, do you?

I go round and round and round on this.
"We can't trust Bush on a judicial nomination."
"Well, okay, Bush (and Miers) have done pretty well on judicial nominations, but she's not qualified."
"Well, maybe she's qualified but there are more qualified candidates."
"Well, okay maybe I haven't actually read the paper trail of those other more qualified candidates, nor have I seen the FBI report, nor the interviews with friends and enemies, nor interviewed the candidate, nor do I really know the lanscape of the Senate in getting any of those candidates confirmed...but she is only been nominated because Bush knows her so well!

Fine. Here is my response to THAT. (scroll down to the "hiring an employee analogy)

[republicofdavis]

Within your argument you said that she was "eminently qualified."

This is my definition of "eminently": "Towering or standing out above others; prominent: an eminent peak."

I don't believe she fits that description.

Having said that, I can't find anything to disagree with about the rest of your argument. But that one bit prevents me from agreeing with you. It's the SUPREME Court. When you get the opportunity, you should try to place legal giants on that bench.

I am not here to disparage Ms. Miers. She is clearly a woman of great accomplishment. There are, I'm sure hundreds or thousands of others that the President could have named that would have been equally qualified. I would criticize them just the same, as being not quite qualified enough.