Two reasons why I don't like this pick, without even going into "cronyism." One, it tells the left that they did the right thing in opposing Robert Bork in '87, because now, even with a Republican majority in the Senate, a Republican president feels that he has to nominate a "stealth candidate" that has no long paper trail of decisions or a record of constitutional law to to review.
Secondly, what does this tell young conservative judges and attorneys who might someday aspire to the court? That they better keep a low profile, because anything they do or say that would indicate a belief in the Constitution the way the founders intended can be used against you.
I thought Roberts was an inspired pick, but Miers is looking to be just not qualified. With Brownback expressing reservations, I am beginning to doubt that she will make it out of the judiciary committee hearings.
You make an excellent point here; if Bush doesn't have the guts to nominate and fight for a clearly-defined conservative jurist, none will be clearly defined in the future.
I think she's a goner in committee too, unless she bails out on her own - which is the usual face-saving move.
Then the question becomes: with Bush Jr. in a snit over his screwup, will he just go with his other crony Gonzales (that's Spanish for "Souter") and hang tough on an even worse pick, while Luttig, Rogers Brown and Owen continue to gather dust?
Maybe they could conclude we need more principled conservative senators. Maybe some of them could conclude they should run.