Very good column, Lisa.
She's almost on Social Security, for goodness sake.
It seems that the Conservative/Republican side has one of the same bad traits that the Liberal/Democrat side shows all the time. That is one of elitism. Miers is not "Harvard, yale, or Princeton," ie. Ivy League. She has not rubbed elbows with the in crown of the right. These elitist really do not know the world would go on without them, and be better off. I read this morning that Bush is not qualified to choose a Justice to the SC. That is elitist. One of the things the elitist of both side hate most about Bush is he is not one of them. Even though he is Ivy League, it really is not what defines him and he is proud of that. It just didn't seem to color him blue. Miers is going to be good, maybe great, but just not in a blueblood way.
Something that struck me with most of the complaints was that she was not a 'firebrand', and that people didn't think she would 'fight' against the Democrats. Why does everything have to be a battle? Would someone who got into a yelling match with Up-Chuck Schumer actually turn out to be a better jurist? Why do WE feel the need for validation by someone who we believe would be more 'in your face' to the Democrats.
It is my belief that a woman who has had to deal with Texan men for her entire career will be plenty strong enough to deal with the effete Dems on the Judiciary Committee. They probably will never know what hit them. They are so used to dealing with abrasive, aggressive women such as the feminist leaders, Barbara Boxer and Her Heinous, that they won't know how to handle a soft spoken woman who, according to accounts by those who have known her for years, will likely be wielding an iron fist in a velvet glove.
A choice as characteristically fine as Colin Powell, Paul O'Neil, George Tenet, Norm Mineta, Harvey Pitt, Bernard Kerik, Michael Brown, Dick Armitage, Julie Myers?
Should I continue...?
Ahh yes, recrimination, that will all make us feel better if there are decades of bad law.
That is because no one believes Miers qualifications to be anything but President Bush's familiarity with her. Not even in this piece defending Miers does the writer even mention Miers' qualifications.
Advancement based on familiarity rather than performance, record or qualifications is the definition of cronyism.
Cronyism is something we would expect from Clinton, not Bush. We expect better from conservatives, Bush included.
The charge of "cronyism" is total bunk.
I'd be far more worried about a candidate unknown to the President.
Go with people you know and trust; this seems a sensible rule, especially in light of recent history.