The fact that we are still talking about this and groping is a sign that all is not well to say the least.
Here is something I posted on a thread about the Will article, and he places a lot of emphasis on McCain FeinGold/Campaign finance reform (CFR):
CFR is truly an abomination...Will is dead on here. In fact, I have heard some argue that a Pres who signs a bill he believes to be unconstitutional is (hypothetically, obviously) worthy of impeachment for knowingly violating the oath. Not a bad point if you think about it (but again purely hypothetical).
Now...that said...let me try to bring some balance to this because these threads are descending to the level of the evolution/creation threads (you're an idiot, no you're an idiot).
Here is what we know.
First, to say that Bush is not a domestic conservative is a huge understatement. He has in fact presided over and supported and pushed through some of the worst measures in 30 or 40 years, including prescription drugs and McCain Feingold. Let's don't even get started borders, and the "assault weapons" ban. This is obviously a huge source of distrust for conservatives and moderates even. They simply don't trust him to do what is right. That mistrust (which GWB and Rove have earned) spills over into this appointment, which is the most important domestic act yet (even more so than the Chief...where we could only lose ground...here we can gain).
So in that context of mistrust, he give us a nominee that he and only he knows. If the political guys in the White House are as smart as they tell us, they should have seen that this would create a firestorm. Which it has. And it's not just the cranks like people here at FR. It includes Will, David Frum, Ann Coulter, and Rush (to varying degrees). The Fed Soc., ACLJ and Dobson have chimed in positively.
And I am certainly in the mistrust camp.
But let's take a step back and try to match apples with apples. It is true that Bush is a disaster on the domestic front generally. BUT..he has had some outstanding Court of Appeals appointments. Anyone that appoints Michael McConnell has a good judicial screening team. And he stood by those that were filibustered and eventually got folks like Owen into their seat. That took a bit of grit. Why he's not always like that on the domesic front, I have no idea, but he has done really well on C of A. In fact, I think his C of A appointments will rival Reagan's (not that this will get a lot of coverage).
And we would all probably agree that his personnel in his administration is damn fine.
So...matching apples to apples....there is hope to think that while this choice is hardly awe-inspiring, it might in fact turn out to be a reliable vote. She probably will not be a Scalia or a Thomas...but you know what? She can hire those clerks to make her look like a Scalia or a Thomas. I remember right after Thomas went out, he actually hired some old Scalia clerks. That had to give Scalia some confidence that he was on the right track! If she is not too proud to do that, I suspect we will see some pretty snappy writing out of her.
I too am just shaking my head with this appointment. Another opportunity wasted. But I don't think she is going to be less than a reliable vote.
Nothing can undo what this President has done to the First Amendment.
Nothing short of legislative repeal can undo what he has done with the prescription drugs entitlement.
But again if you put oranges next to oranges, and apples next to apples, I think you can conclude rationally Miers will be a solid vote.
God I hope so.
We didn't know Scalia WAS Scalia and we didn't know Thomas WAS Thomas until well after they were seated. All the "duds" Kennedy, Souter, etc, were vetted beforehand (Kennedy was vetted by the great Mark Levin!) and approved for nomination. I can guarantee that all were considered high caliber.
In the fullness of time, some turned into wimpy elitists. By sheer luck, Scalia and Thomas were not among them.
Face it. The only judge on that court whose decisions in all cases could be pre-determined for eternity is Ruth Bader Ginsberg, Council for the ACLU. Everyone else is a crap shoot.
Actually, its amazing to see the conservatives all using the same talking points. I hate that when the libs do it and I'm not too crazy about it now.