Reply #40: I do see the importance of this

[onenote]

And I think we are in a far stronger position because of the Miers screw up than we would be otherwise. The argument that Bush is entitled to extreme deference on his appointees has been punched full of holes, first by the Michael Brown fiasco and then by the Miers nomination. Sure, the republicans will fall in line behind whatever wingnut he names. But because Bush screwed up with Miers, the Dems are on much stronger ground in filibustering a wingnut. The nice thing is that because O'Connor is staying on the court until a replacement is named, the public can't be swayed by the argument that the Dems are leaving the court at less than full strength. If we can successfully filibuster a wingnut nominee, pressure on the pres will mount to find a qualified middle ground nominee. The fundie wing of the party won't like it, but the George Will's etc. who complained about Miers lack of qualifications will be in no position to object.

Its a dangerous strategy, no doubt.And if Miers had made it through, there would've been distinct benefits -- a dispirited right wing in particular. But their disappointment might well have been temporary if, as I believe was likely, she turned out to be a stealth Scalia clone.

onenote