[jackbenimble]

If the Republicans do not vote to confirm, they are acknowledging the Democrat's argument that it is OK to vote against a nominee strictly because you are unhappy with their political position.

Maybe they are making a principled statement that they don't believe she is a qualified candidate to serve in one of the most powerful offices in the government. That is how I would be voting. I don't care if she is against abortion. Compared to many of the other possible choices she is a legal light weight. She is nowhere near the top of her profession.

[alnick]

Maybe they are making a principled statement that they don't believe she is a qualified candidate to serve in one of the most powerful offices in the government. That is how I would be voting. I don't care if she is against abortion. Compared to many of the other possible choices she is a legal light weight. She is nowhere near the top of her profession.

Acting on a baseless conclusion does not a principaled stand make.

[Crush T Velour]

Maybe they are making a principled statement that they don't believe she is a qualified candidate to serve in one of the most powerful offices in the government.

Nope. She is definitely qualified. See here.

You haven't read the pros and cons of even your favorite option, let alone ALL the "more qualified candidates". You really don't know given their records, background, interviews, and the landscape of the Senate, whether there were more *better* candidates or not.

This is "more qualified" cr*p is ridiculous arrogance. It sounds like something Ted Kennedy would have said about Clarence Thomas...in fact, I think maybe he did.

[Paloma_55]

Compared to many of the other possible choices she is a legal light weight. She is nowhere near the top of her profession.

I am sure that the likes of Patrick Leahy will agree with your approach.

[Paloma_55]

Compared to many of the other possible choices she is a legal light weight. She is nowhere near the top of her profession.

I am sure that the likes of Patrick Leahy will agree with your approach.

[BluH2o]

Compared to many of the other possible choices she (Miers) is a legal light weight. She is nowhere near the top of her profession.

My sentiment exactly ... I want the best possible candidate nominated by Bush (as in Roberts) and Harriet Miers ain't the one. Not many presidents get the opportunity to nominate two justices to the SCOTUS ... Bush does ... and he's squandering his second opportunity by nominating a flyweight to a heavy weight position. Miers for some federal judgeship, OK ... to the SC absolutely not.