[borkrules]

...but somehow Krauthammer and George Wiill act like all Bush has to do is submit a conservative nominee and presto, we will triumph over the democrats? It makes me a little dubious of their opinions, to say the least.

Well, they aren't dealing with that argument very extensively at all, as far as I can tell. But, I have to assume that they believe the President could win a Senate fight to change the rules and crush a filibuster that would inevitably result from nominating someone like McConnell or Owens. I haven't tried to read the tea leaves or count votes so I'm not sure who's right and who's wrong and much would depend on the PR campaign.

[stop_fascism]

Will was a supporter of the Dem's "right" to filibuster. That makes his column on Miers truly incomprehensible.

[rogue yam]

Well, they (Krauthammer and Will) aren't dealing with that argument (the confirmability issue) very extensively at all, as far as I can tell.

I agree with you that confirmability is given short shrift in the Krauthammer and Will pieces. This is because President Bush himself claims that Harriet Miers is the most qualified candidate, period, and that therefore confirmability is a non-issue. I don't believe the President when he says this, which is disappointing to me since one of the things I've liked most about him is that he usually plays it so straight. Do you believe President Bush when he says that Harriet Miers is the most qualified candidate he could find? Do you, yourself, find Ms Miers to be more qualified than, say, Michael Luttig?