[ClearCase_guy]

I'm going to use a lot of hyperbole as I steer the ship of my thoughts toward the moorings of legal matters that are best considered while listening to In-A-Gadda-Davida and chomping on small crackers.

[/overwrought writing style]

[JohnnyZ]

Nice summation.

[Blood of Tyrants]

Given Reid's sophisticated evaluations of judicial and presidential competence, what more recommendation could one need?

Ihave said from the beginning that this is enough for me to oppose this nomination.

[ConservativeDude]

"the uprising seems to be gaining surprising momentum"

I'm not entirely sure. I'd like to hear the author's evidence on that (or any other freepers).

[LS]

This is silly. MOST Supreme Court justices never write memorable decisions, and MOST vote with a majority or minority in which ONE or TWO great legal minds direct the court. Always has been, always will be.

I've said it before: one Scalia on the Court is a dream; nine would be a nightmare.

[BikerNYC]

...but there is no sign that she has the intellectual depth or sophisticated understanding of the Constitution to seriously challenge the liberal legal mainstream.

What the hell does that mean? All she needs to do is get four votes to side with her and what she says will become law. She doesn't have to challenge the liberal legal mainstream, it will have to challenge her.

[Colonial Warrior]

Wonder if she is a nominee that was meant to slide by Dems and RINOs?

[AFPhys]

.

"The Miers nomination may prove to be a wake-up call so energizing the Republican base that they rise in revolt, scuttling the nomination and demanding that Bush fulfill his promise to name a Scalia or a Thomas. That seemed unlikely at first, but the uprising seems to be gaining surprising momentum."
--->

I beg to differ with the author. Even the poll taken of FR conservatives puts the lie to that:

Do you approve of Harriet Miers for Supreme Court?

Yes
34.5%
No
30.3%
Need more info
29.8%
I'm voting Hillary!
3.4%
Pass
2.0%

[ Details · Polls ]

[KMAJ2]

NR and NRO have lost any credibility on this issue.

[MNJohnnie]

When only 12% of Conservatives support your position NRO, it is NOT the WH who is "losing ground". But cling to this nonsense. It has been a real eye opener to find out who are the pretend Conservatives in the movement who merely hitched their wagon to our start so they could ride along. Glad to find out that since Buckley retired, NRO has been over run by self important Dinosaur Media style gate keepers who's egos are completely out of touch with their relevance to the Conservative movement. Been fun the last 10 days watching NRO move over to join Bill Kristol and Pat Buchanan in the whiny, self-important, perpetually angry, and completely irrelevant, caucus of the Conservative Movement.

[ChildOfThe60s]

sophisticated understanding of the Constitution

Huh? IMHO, what we need is less parsing of the constitution and a more literal approach. You know, it says this, so, duh, that must be what it means.

I don't know about Miers, but lawyers have made the constitution out to be a lot more complicated than it is. We need to get down to basics.

If the Constitution does not specifically give a power to the feds, then it belongs to the states. How freakin complicated is that concept???

[Kryptonite]

the Republican base . . . demanding that Bush fulfill his promise to name a Scalia or a Thomas.

GIBSON: Mr. President, the next question is for you, and it comes from Jonathan Michaelson, over here.

MICHAELSON: Mr. President, if there were a vacancy in the Supreme Court and you had the opportunity to fill that position today, who would you choose and why?

BUSH: I'm not telling.

(LAUGHTER)

I really don't have -- haven't picked anybody yet. Plus, I want them all voting for me.

http://www.debates.org/pages/trans2004c.html