This encapsulates the difference between the administration and it's opponents. In economic terms, the administration discounts the future very heavily. 99% of the remaining important things in W's life will happen in the next 3 1/2 years. After that, he retires to the ranch and gives an occasional award. For movement conservatives, the next 20 years is the relevant time frame.
So the value to W of a win NOW is big, regardless that there were better nominee's available and W regards the damage from a loss NOW as huge. He also realizes that there really isn't much the conservatives can do to him in the next 3 1/2 years. So the downside is slim.
(One way to see the truth of this is to ask yourself, what if O'Conner and Rehnquist had retired well before the 2004 election, when W needed the base's votes? Miers? Don't think so.)
Folks with a 20 year time-frame will value those scenarios differently. But aside from complaining, there's not really much us 20 year-ers can do. Miers will be confirmed. If she's another Thomas, we can all raise a glass and celebrate. If she's a bomb and/or Roberts is a bomb, the party will have a different nominee in 2008 and he/she will say, don't blame me, I didn't nominate her.
What puzzles me is the strangely inappropriate responses of the administration to the opposition. Leveling charges of sexism and elitism against a big chunk of your base is just weird to hear from Republicans. If you are going to jam something down a friends throat, you should try to avoid insulting them while you are doing it.