The Republicans haven’t sacrificed any principle here either. Miers wasn’t denied a hearing or an up-or-down vote. She would have gotten one if the President hadn’t withdrawn her. But she was a joke and the entire Senate could see it. I can’t understand what the problem here is.

Not a big surprise considering the amount of consternation, concern, and anger fostered by her nomination by President Bush. It will be interesting to see how he follows up.

Harriet Miers gives up and (almost every) Conservative breathes a sigh of relief. Now we’ll see if Bush understands how dangerous is to go against his own electoral base. In RealClearPolitics’ short-list, Camillo chooses Michael McConnell. We don’t …

The anti-Miers crowd one a pyrrhic victory today. The extreme right’s confidence and tolerance was tested, and found wanting. Instead of debating the merits of Miers, and allowing her to get to the confirmation hearings – too many in that crow…

The arrogance of the David Frum Gang distilled into three sentences right there. I see the last fig leaf of fairness in the political process going out the window right there: Why should ANYONE nominated by the President deserve a hearing? Why not sabotage ANYONE he puts up and just leave the Senate out of it altogether? Why should Luttig or McConnell or Owen or anyone else appear before the Senate either? And really, who cares what the facts are? Just find something a future nominee wrote on a bad day and use it to prove he’s not really qualified for serving on Mount Olympus (oops, I mean the Supreme Court).

Even if you’re convinced that Harriet Miers is absolutely positively THE worst judicial nominee in the history of the Republic, the fact that conservatives are now throwing the principle of “judicial nominees deserve a fair hearing and an up-or-down vote” out the window so enthusiastically will mean that they’ll find it a lot harder to get people to listen the next time they decide to state that principle to defend someone they LIKE against an onslaught of criticism. But then I guess pointing that out makes me a “Kool-aid drinking, soul-selling cretin” in the eyes of someone who deserves no respect from me.

Say what you want, but where’s the defense of Miers? You say she deserved a hearing, but why? Because the President nominated her? Sorry, not enough. I don’t mind a healthy disagreement between the wings of the Party, but what I don’t accept is those who think I have sold out the GOP because I thought Miers was a joke of a nominee. NRO, George Will, Charles Krauthammer, and the rest of the right who opposed Miers are no less part of the conservative movement than Hewitt and the rest of the go-along-with-anythings. We are not shock troops and we do not owe Bush our unswerving allegiance just because he happens to be one of us (even if it is name only).

Hewitt isn’t a cretin just because of this one moment; he’s a cretin because he can’t seem to find anything this president has done that he won’t support. He’s the worst kind of sycophant and Miers is just a symptom.

Lessons Learned From The Miers Debacle!
What happens now that Harriet Miers has withdrawn her nomination to the Supreme Court? Miers will stay as Whitehouse council, and President Bush has another choice to make. What has President Bush learned fro…

Looks like Harriet Miers has thrown in the towel. Withdrawal letter here. I have mixed but mostly bad feelings about this. Oh, I agree she wasn’t necessarily the mo…