Yes, you nailed it.
This is just political sniping based on nothing.
I share the angst over O'connor these many years, but the fact is, that finding a woman who will not let her personal belief system affect her judgment is quite a task.
If Bush thought for a second that Miers would do that, he would not have anointed her. His reputation depends on that choice, as her ability to remain separate and consider the legal matters on Constitutional grounds will likely be revealed within a year or so.
Finally, as to this article, i see no evidence that she was on the selection committee. College staff are generally libs, with a occasional conservative found with tenure. Conservatives are just not in high numbers in the education field as the Dems are and we have been trying to change that....trying a great deal.
Those two women speakers were on the speaking circuit and were popular at university settings, they are truly leaders in the womens leadership cadre, and that is that. You can't change that reality.
If someone wants to do research on the numbers of notable conservatives speaking at universities on womens issues because of their positions in the womens movements, you will be displeased at the number chosen every time in most every university. SMU included.
Bush has acted as a commander and not as a weak leader who sticks his finger in the air before he makes a decision. He believes in this woman, and that should carry a lot of weight.
I suspect that he will stick by her all the way, and she will never bow out unless he wants her to. She it far too loyal for that to occur.
I look forward to her appearances in the Senate, and I will not compare her to Roberts. I will take her measure against O'Connor and other women of her caliber. I know that like Roberts, she will not legislate from the bench, and that is and has been my concern. Ann Coulter stated on O'Reilly's show that she wants a judge who will vote conservative issues on the court, and she was not ashamed saying it.
I just want a fair minded protector of the Constitution and American tradition. I want someone who can be critical of precedent if required and realizes the final arbiter is the document we cherish. I want her to be able to put all her personal bias aside when deciding cases.
That is what is needed. Years of liberal benchmanship will melt away under these conditions, and a biased conservative is the last thing we need on the court. How could someone like that convince other members of the court that a position taken was legitimate. They must be able to put the politics aside and do what is right.
That is a conservative ideal in every way.
JRB, Priscilla Owen, Edith Jones, etc. I found plenty.