[jyl]

Thom, the list paints a picture of an interesting person. I'm not convinced it paints a picture of a very exceptional person. I definitely don't yet see a picture of the "most-qualified person" to be found in the whole nation, as Bush claims.

Given all the "cronyism" issues currently dogging the Administration, I'm somewhat surprised at this pick. It's kind of playing right into a significant and negative public perception. For a lifetime post on the highest court of the land, Bush nominates a Texas crony / no judging experience / highest achievement was state lottery commissioner and so on.

Brian, I imagine the Democrats are trying to figure out how hard they really want to fight this nomination.

One option would be to put up a show fight designed to inflict political damage on Bush with the independents (yet another unqualified crony appointment, where are the Arabian horses?) and with the religious conservatives (each waffling or conciliatory answer on hot-button social issues is more evidence of Bush's betrayal) and then let her be confirmed "over protest". The theory would be that she's probably less radically conservative than other people Bush could have nominated and, being 60 y/o, has a shorter potential lifespan on the Court.

The other option would be an all-out fight to defeat her and force Bush to either advance another nominee of the quality of John Roberts, or to bow to the religious right and nominate a clearly extreme social conservative that will cost him support from independents and the business conservative type of Republican (as distinguished from the religious conservative sort).

It'll be interesting to see how the political maneuvering works out and whether the Democrats can actually get it together to form a strategy.

I personally haven't formed an opinion, although on a still-preliminary basis I don't honestly see, on paper, what makes her so exceptional. I've known and been underwhelmed by managing partners at very large law firms, and how impressive are the positions of state lottery commissioner (appointed by Bush) and White House counsel (appointed by Bush) anyway?

One thing I'm finding amusing is the feverish attempt by the Administration to reassure the religious conservatives that Miers will indeed vote to overturn Roe, while maintaining the fiction that there's no litmus test and that Bush and Miers, two born-again Christians, have never even mouthed the word "abortion" to each other during their decades of closeness. If the Democrats are competent, this could make for some scathingly funny questioning.