When they can come up with a logical substantive reason not to confirm Miers, I might listen. Until then, they're just throwing a temper tantrum.
Many of them have raised the unaddressed conflicts of interest. If you haven't heard the substantive questions that await answers, then you haven't been listening.
You are certainly entitled to say whatever you wish here at Free Republic but that is an extremely intellectually dishonest thing to say.
They HAVE offered all the reasons why Miers should not be the nominee, and that is precisely why you accuse them of throwing a temper tantrum.
May I point out that the collective pro-Harriet defense thus far is "trust me," and "she's a pretty good lawyer" (which it appears she is), "shut up you elitists" and "shut up you sexists" oh and "did we not mention she's an evangelical Christian, what more of a code phrase do you nutballs in the extreme Right want from us"
That's hardly a compelling argument for someone to be nominated to the most important SCOTUS opening of the past 30 years.