Jack Risko, of Dinocrat.com, has some characteristically astute comments on the Miers nomination, which he formerly proclaimed was a fight he would watch from the sidelines. Jack's still on the fence, but check out this list of considerations he cites in Miers's favor:

 — more solidly conservative woman than O'Connor
— she's on Reid's list of acceptable candidates, probably as a bit of flattery and condescension in the presidential advisory process, but what a way to stick it to the Dems
— limited paper trail on Roe v. Wade matters, though clearly anti—abortion
— non—threatening to some Democrats since she made Reid's list, which is important because:
(a) — avoids defection of liberal Senate Republicans
(b) — does not encourage the aged and sick John Paul Stevens and Ruth Bader Ginsburg to hang on to their seats by their fingernails; ergo
(c) — the Miers pick helps get potentially two more nominees pre—2008
— Miers is insulated against too much criticism from the Right because of the brilliant and credentialed Roberts, and the judges put through by the Gang of 14, all evidence of the absolutely consistent Bush philosophy on judicial appointees
— finally, we know we are going to have the Gunfight at the OK Corral when a McConnell or Luttig or Brown is nominated, but that will be a fight of our own choosing, at our own time: namely, in election season

Jack also notes:

She may be AA or AAA compared with some of the major league players like Michael McConnell, but she can be trusted. (McConnell, highly praised in the blogosphere and elsewhere as an exceptional Supreme Court nominee, just might not give good TV, by the way.)

Follow the link for a hint of what he means.

Thomas Lifson   10 09 05