[workerbee]

I also have noted this unfortunate habit the anti-Miers faction has of taking one citation of her history and treating it as if it is the one and only example offered as to her qualifications. Just go along and pretend like I said this alone qualifies her, if it makes you feel somehow validated.

I'm not anti-Miers, nor have I implied that the lottery job was the "only example" cited by you or anyone else. Your smug hostility toward anyone questioning this nomination is unimpressive. If I need "validation" there are commentators on both sides of this debate -- professional pundits as well as many on this forum -- who argue more persuasively than you have.

Have a wonderful day.

[cyncooper]

I'm not anti-Miers, nor have I implied that the lottery job was the "only example" cited by you or anyone else.

I was replying to what you said:

It looks like she was a decent manager, but the article you cite is hardly compelling in terms of a SC nomination.

That is in fact your implication.

Refuting weak points and arguments is not "hostile".

Furthermore, others have explicitly stated that "the only qualification she has is (fill in the blank with Religion or the Texas Bar)" and I was pointing to the fallacy of those statements as well.