Whether or not she was qualified is irrelevant to me at this time. I do not know if she was qualified.
My side of the aisle did not give follow their own guidelines. An up or down vote. If she was as incomptetent as has been portrayed, it would have been obvious during the hearings. On the flip side, maybe we would have found out she was comptent. I do not know. I only know what others think they know.
Hell, the venom began as soon as her last name was out of the President's mouth. The GOP has it's fair share of hypocrites. Imagine what would be happening if they took such a hard line against the lies Joe Wilson has been peddling as fact or against the tactics of the dems.
Yes! I would love to see that.
One thing, of course, is that the press would never give them the time of day for that, though. By contrast, the leftwing press has been crowing over opposition to Harriet Miers, and there have been front page articles in my local NYT paper quoting the inflammatory remarks made by some conservatives. That certainly wouldn't happen if they were attacking Joe Wilson. The press loved this GOP-eats-its-own scenario and has done everything possible to magnify it.
An "up or down vote" refers only to the procedure in the Sentate, NOT public debate, which is protected by the First Amendment. The problem in the Senate is that a group of minority Senators use a procedural tactic to prevent the majority from voting. This has nothing to do with our right to voice our opinions! I can't believe how many people on FR are making this mistake.
Worth repeating.
Name one conservative who argued against giving her an up or down vote. What was suggested, and apparently followed, was that Miers spare herself the confirmation hearings. Not because she wasn't ENTITLED to an up-or-down vote, but because it was suspected that such a vote wasn't in HER interest.