No, it's not. There have been plenty of conservative pundits coming out for Miers. Sowell wrote a very good piece on the subject, and his analysis tends to be very rational and sober, unlike folks like Norquist and Weyrich, who have their own power bases and interests.
This is not a glowing endorsement, it is the third stage of grief (denial, resentment, bargaining, depression,acceptance)
dirtboy wrote: "unlike folks like Norquist and Weyrich, who have their own power bases and interests."
So let me get this straight...anyone who opposes her is irrational and serving special interests, while those in favor of her are rational and sober?
Personally, I studied the arguments on both sides. They both make good points. However, the very fact that there ARE two sides within the conservative base makes this nomination stink. We are at war with each other instead of the libs.
In my opinion, Bush should have picked a nomination to unite his base. Even if we would have lost in the Senate, sometimes it's important to fight the fight. Who knows? We might have even won the fight, but you'll never know since he picked a lackluster crony instead.
I could be wrong but I thought Weyrich said he was never voting Republican again sometime ago.Does this mean he has changed?
People with no power bases, like Sowell and Williams, must sing for their supper and suck up to the boss for whatever scraps he deigns to throw.
Actually, IIRC, Sowell wrote that the Republican Party is a gaggle of unprincipled sleazeballs, and the Miers pick was justified on the grounds that she's the one he could slip by the weasels.
But I don't recall Bush Jr. campaigning exactly a year ago with "I don't have the guts to fight Jim Jeffords, so I'm going to nominate cyphers for the Supreme Court. Vote for me!"