Frankly, I'm not a fan of the Miers nomination either. On the other hand, I agree with you that the lack of respect in this "open letter" (read "excuse to vent while appearing polite") is ridiculous and consescending.
Part of me thinks that the President deserves the benefit of the doubt because he has been extremely trustworthy with his judicial appointments. Then part of me realizes that Ms. Miers truly has no qualification to be deciding important constitutional issues, while other supremely (pardon the pun) qualified conservative men and women were passed over for mere political expediency.
Melanie is on vacation til monday's show.
.. and we should at least keep in mind, Miers is no Ruth Bader Ginsburg , she has never worked for the ACLU, much less, led it.
I know it is of little consolation too many, but keep in mind there will likely be other openings soon enough on the court. Miers is truly a faith-based appointment.
Yes, she most certainly does have such qualifications. That is the fallacy of this whole argument.
This argument is not about Ms. Miers abilities. It is about power. The so-called conservative punditocracy and its thundering herd of reactionary followers want the power to determine the nominee. They want to strip the President of his Constitutional power to make his own choice.
Furthermore, by calling for her to withdraw prior to the senate hearings, they want to strip the senate from its Constitutional power to advise and consent.
It is purely about power. One of the annointed whom the so-called conservative punditocracy had on its short list was not chosen. So they are having a hissy fit.