Miers. The Readers Digest Version.

I've been reading about the controversy over Miers nomination. Some are saying that the "elitists" are only against her because she didn't go to an Ivy league school. They are saying she doesn't have the hefty intellectual background.

Beldar, a well respect trial lawyer here in Houston has at least a dozen posts on Miers. All them very informative if you want to wade through them all. He clearly believes she has the background. Here he compares the histories of Miers and Roberts.

The Volokh Conspiracy best sums it up between what he calls Gods vs Geeks. In other words, religious conservatives vs intellectuals, (not that many aren't both, of course) with Dobson and Santorum supporting the nomination, and Will, Frum, and Kristol harshly criticizing the President for having nominated Miers in the first place

"In sum, the two groups aren't disagreeing, but rather answering different questions. The commentators are ruminating on process, while the politicians and political leaders are focusing on the bottom line vote."

Once again conservatives fight when we can easily win. Our inhouse bickering just brings us down and it is unproductive. The left just sits back for the show They don't want Miers anyway because they strongly suspect she is pro-life (the bottom line for them) and they would gladly see her sink.

Given the heat of the conservative opposition, that may well happen. This Stanford Professor thinks the nomination will be withdrawn before a vote because of Arlen Spector. An interesting take.

I don't see that happening though. unless Miers gets so frustrated by this whole process and people start smearing her personal life in some way. Scalia himself said yesterday that he would not want to go through the process of confirmation today. The "borking" of Robert Bork began this whole ugly personal smear process and the Clarence Thomas hearings brought us where we are today. Thomas was tough. He put up with more than most of us would have from those smear merchants. I am not sure Miers could. In her case, I don't think it will be so much about her personal social life (but it could, of course, if anything interesting comes up), but about her personal faith. I wonder if Ruth Bader-Ginsburg's faith was ever discussed? Did anyone ever question what synagogue or church she attended? I don't think so. It only matters if you are Republican.

With Roberts, his intellectual capabilities were so obvious that all those smart guys in the Senate who were Democrat had to think that Roberts was so smart that he couldn't possibly let his faith interfere with his thinking process. But with Miers, they are afraid she isn't the brain that Roberts is and might actually let her faith be a consideration. For the conservatives that oppose her, they think that she isn't smart enough to be a strong strict constitutionalist. Because, amazingly enough, it isn't all about abortion to Republicans, as it is to Democrats. It's about a lot of issues from property rights to gun rights to state rights. Those conservatives think she might be wishy washy on those issues and feel she will be compelled to go with Kennedy and Souter out of deference to their experience.

I still trust Bush. He knows what was needed on the court. The elites can bleat all they wish, but from what I have read about her, she seems more than qualified to me. But then, I am just a simple woman.

So if you were wondering what all the fuss was about. That is the way I see it.