Fein is an absolute buffoon for criticizing Miers as "outrageous" for relying upon separation of powers to urge a veto. State supreme courts routinely define the ethics of the practice of law, which include the reasonableness of fees. Legislatures have little to no business stepping in and usurping the role of state supreme courts in this regard. There is nothing outrageous about her position.
So instead the Compost throws out a few notes of hers to feed the (so-called conservative) critics. You know, the ones who haven't done a damn thing about the filibusters but now demand that all nominees be known conservatives, instead of stealth conservatives.
I love how this article also uses Brooks to criticize this line: ""More and more, the intractable problems in our society have one answer: broad-based intolerance of unacceptable conditions and a commitment by many to fix problems."
Replace society with Bush and conditions with requiring only known conservatives be nominated and the line becomes: "More and more, the intractable problem with Bush has one answer: broad-based intolerance of the practice of not nominating known conservatives and a commitment by many to fix problems."
In this context Miers' writing as State Bar President shouldn't sound stupid to the anti-Miers zealots around here but of course it does because they're all running around like chicken little, having done nothing to establish the credibility to demand that only known conservatives be nominated.
Uh, well, there is this little issue that most legislatures, including the Congress, are empowered to pass laws to regulate the establishment and practices of the courts.