That is incoherent. It was not implied. Why is this being put into terms of a personal attack on your integrity? Why are you taking broad strokes at fellow conservatives? The 25%(granted it's the unscientific number from the current FR poll) are adamantly arguing that the entire Conservative movement would be better served in the process of selecting a nominee if one had been picked with an established record. Including those Miers supporters who are openly anti-elitist in their stance here and in their defense of Miers, including those who are Evangelicals, even including Freeper lawyers.
I don't see how you can accept this outside of rational purview.
If an established record was the requirement for the Supreme Court, the founding fathers would have written that condition in.
They did not, leaving the Court open for nominees from all walks of life and not just judges with established records.
You're the one who said I was insulting 25 percent of the people on this forum.
I merely pointed out that it goes both ways, a concept that never seens to dawn on you purist.