The Debate over the Miers Nomination

Liberty Call US, Deck Log ^ | October 16, 2005 | Charles Bloomer

[Gunner9mm]

The Debate over the Miers Nomination

By Charles Bloomer

The nomination of Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court has generated the most vigorous debate among Conservatives and Republicans in recent years. Listening to the media, one would think that this debate signals the demise of the Republican Party specifically, and the Conservative movement in general. Every day since the Miers nomination was announced and the first opposition appeared, the liberal media has trumpeted the growing chasm, the widening ideological gap, the irreconcilable differences among the Right that will inevitably lead to the death of the Republican Party, the alienation of Conservative core support, and the casting of the Conservatives and Republicans into another 40 years in the minority party wilderness.

The focus of the debate differs from the focus of the media reporting. The debate boils down to a specific issue – Harriet Meirs’ qualifications to sit on the Supreme Court. The discussion has divided the Right into two groups: Those who believe President Bush’s “Trust Me” justification and those who would rather “Trust, but Verify”. The critics of the president’s nomination of Meirs are concerned that Meirs has no paper trail, no scholarly legal writings, and no experience on the bench that can be reviewed to determine her suitability for a lifetime appointment to he highest court in the land. At this point, most critics are not saying Meirs is not qualified, just that there is not enough evidence to decide either way.

[TeleStraightShooter]

K.Rove knew the "Bad Cop" role would unwittingly emerge from the right.
The filibustering (D)rat senators will soon jump on her Trojan Bandwagon.

[JohnnyZ]

At this point, most critics are not saying Meirs is not qualified, just that there is not enough evidence to decide either way.

I'd say lack of qualifications makes one not qualified. But that's just me ....