Guest-blogging Part III: Turning The Tide On Miers

According to the Washington Times, over half of the Senate GOP thinks that Harriet Miers isn’t qualified to handle the job she’s been nominated for.

Nearly half of Senate Republicans say they remain unconvinced that Harriet Miers is worthy of being confirmed to the Supreme Court, according to a survey conducted by The Washington Times.

As with the nomination of Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., the vast majority of senators say they will not announce their final decisions about the nomination until after Senate Judiciary Committee hearings, which are expected sometime next month.
What's troubling for President Bush, however, is that 27 Republican senators -- almost half of his party's members in the chamber -- have publicly expressed specific doubts about Miss Miers or said they must withhold any support whatsoever for her nomination until after the hearings.

A typical chilly response to the Miers nomination came from Sen. Elizabeth Dole, the North Carolina Republican who is one of Mr. Bush's most unwavering supporters.

After Chief Justice Roberts was nominated to lead the court, Mrs. Dole issued a statement to "commend President Bush for his decision to nominate John Roberts to be the next chief justice of the United States."

Not so with Miss Miers.

"As the nomination process moves ahead, I look forward to reviewing Ms. Miers' qualification and her views on the proper role of the judiciary," Mrs. Dole said. "I am hopeful that the confirmation process will be both fair and civil."

I, too, hope she gets a civil and fair hearing. However at this point, I’m beginning to see what Publius has been warning about. The things coming out about this woman are not good. And the deeper people go, the more empty that qualification barrel is.

Sen. George Allen, a Virginia Republican who previously has been strongly supportive of Mr. Bush's judicial nominees, said he's not sure about this one. The best thing Miss Miers' has going for her confirmation, he said last week, is Mr. Bush's record of picking solid conservatives for the bench.

Sen. John Thune, a freshman from South Dakota, said he needs to be convinced, and Sen. Trent Lott, Mississippi Republican, has been among the most skeptical, saying, "There are a lot more people -- men, women and minorities -- that are more qualified in my opinion by their experience than [Miss Miers] is."

I would like to point out that Sen. Allen being unsure of Ms. Miers is telling. It is believed that Sen. Allen could possibly be a GOP candidate for president in 2008, so it remains to be seen whether he has true reservations, or this is just politics as usual. Initially I was convinced. I was convinced by the president that he makes solid choices. I ignored the backlash from conservatives calling the appointment cronyism or nepotism. I never gave any of the hard right critics a chance; those being Ann Coulter, Pat Buchanan, and George Will. I don’t even think Mr. Will fits into that category, however the chastisement the president received from him was heard around the nation.

I'd also like to point out that the Times, overall, misses the point. The GOP cited, and those that are still upset over this nomination, are sending a clear message to the president that they can't simply take Ms. Miers at face value. They need to see the proof that she won't end up being like Justice Souter, who's about as helpful as a broken arm, and is about as competent as a mushroom. "We the people" have watched the Supreme Court lose it's mind on more than one occasion. Can we really afford to allow Miers on the court just on face value? I must agree with Publius: It's not wise nor it prudent. We need to know where she stands.

Of course, the Democrats are licking their lips over this. Not only are they relishing in this internal civil war, they're looking to be the heroes for the president. The twenty-seven Republicans unhappy with her isn't enough to block her on the floor of the Senate. And as the Washington Times appropriately points out, she still receives her vote in the Senate regardless of what the Judiciary Committee decides. She simply passes out with an unfavorable review. If the Democrats can get their party in line, and they can maintain at least six of the Republicans unhappy with her, they could get Ms. Miers passed for the president. Again, that would not be a good sign for the president, nor would it look good for Ms. Miers.

But there are people who have made their opinions known, and done so in a quiet, well-mannered way. Charles Krauthammer wrote an excellent piece last week against Miers. It was scathing, but it was not rude or mean-spirited. Likewise, as Publius pointed out yesterday, Ed Morrissey—Captain’s Quarters—wrote an enlightening piece regarding Miers in the Washington Post yesterday. For all those keeping score, this is the piece I read that made switch sides. Mr. Morrissey is correct on a number of levels in the piece, but most of all he is correct on the issue of the internal factions within the GOP, and that if they don’t get this fight under control, America can watch us tear the party apart on live TV. A few months ago, it was the Democrats that were ripping each other apart, all over the nomination of Howard Dean as the DNC chairman. Since then, they have calmed down, but they’re still willing to eat their young.

I am standing with Publius on this. She is clearly not as qualified as I originally believed. I argued with him last night, and he’s willing to concede that she is a good lawyer, was a good city council member, and has accomplished a number of things in her life. But he’s right: That makes a good politician, but it doesn’t make a good judge. So, I hate to abandon my "sister," but I’ll wait for the hearings to begin to see if Harriet Miers is worth the look or the effort to get her on the court.

Mistress Pundit