What is interesting about the difference between Miers and Roberts is that Roberts is percieved to be an intellectual and Miers is not. Otherwise, we know as little about eithers judicial philosophy as the other.
Exactly right...although very few people mention this...we have no idea how John Roberts will come out on the big constititional issues of the scope of the Commerce Clause...federalism and the 10th Amendment...the existence or extent of the "privacy right"...the delegation doctrine, etc., etc.
If he turns out to be a Justice who ignores the 10th Amendment and favors an expansive reading of the Commerce Clause and an ambiguous, undefined privacy right...will conservatives still be talking about how brilliant he is?
That's right. That's why conservatives weren't thrilled with the Roberts pick. The bush bots were, but not conservatives. However, Roberts performance in the hearings made him pretty much invincible. There was no way he wasn't going to be confirmed.
Then came Miers. She'd have been a bad first pick, but she was an even worse second pick from conservatives' standpoint. Most conservatives (and even some bots) were speculating that the NEXT pick (after Roberts) would be a clear cut originalist. Instead we get his secretary. That's another reason the base has gone ballistic on this. It was insult added to injury.
Dude! You are talking nonsense. John Roberts appears more intelligent, he is better educated, and has far more relevant experience. He has a record of decisions on the Federal bench. He was profoundly articulate and erudite in his responses at his confirmation hearings. He is ten years younger. Harriet Miers is no John Roberts.