Miers

If at first you don't succeed, said John Dickerson in Slate.com, try 'œrepackaging.' That seems to be the new White House strategy for salvaging President Bush's widely criticized nomination of Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court. Ever since he nominated her three weeks ago, Bush has tried several ways of selling Miers—all of them disastrous. When conservatives angrily protested her lack of a proven judicial philosophy, Bush responded by citing Miers' background as an evangelical Christian. But the president's blatant use of religion as a qualification only served to insult conservative intellectuals, and to inflame moderates and liberals. So this week, officials sought to turn attention away from Miers' 'œheart' and toward what they say is her 'œkeen, lean legal mind.'

That won't be an easy sell, either, said Howard Fineman and Richard Wolffe in Newsweek. 'œHarriet 2.0' stresses Miers' legal experience and her glass-ceiling-shattering leadership of a Dallas law firm and the Texas Bar Association. But since the 60-year-old Miers has written no judicial opinions or scholarly articles, pundits are now picking apart a paper trail that consists of fawning notes to Bush and pedestrian bar journal columns. Actually, said David Brooks in The New York Times, her writing 'œdoesn't even rise to the level of pedestrian.' It's incomprehensible, and riddled with 'œvapid abstractions.' Consider this typical gem from her 'œPresident's Opinion' column in the Texas Bar Journal: 'œMore and more, the intractable problems in our society have one answer: broad-based intolerance of unacceptable conditions.' Or this: 'œThere is always a necessity to tend to a myriad of responsibilities on a number of cases as well as matters not directly related to the practice of law.' Is this the work of one of the nine finest legal minds in America?

There's simply no way to salvage this nomination, said David Frum in National Review Online. In trying to persuade Bush's Christian conservative base to support an unqualified nominee, the White House has painted itself into a corner. Miers, the administration has been broadly hinting, would at least be a reliable vote to overturn Roe v. Wade. But if Miers acknowledges she's a committed pro-lifer, she'll lose pro-choice Republicans like Arlen Specter. And 'œif she disavows it, she loses conservative Republicans.' Evading the issue won't work, said John Fund in The Wall Street Journal. In a conference call between two of Miers' closest friends and Christian leaders, her friends—both of them sitting judges—said that Miers would 'œabsolutely' vote to overturn Roe. Now, the Judiciary Committee may issue subpoenas to find out whether anyone has, in fact, made such a promise. The hearings could easily 'œturn into a spectacle.'

Subscribe to The Week

Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.

SUBSCRIBE & SAVE

Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters

From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.

From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.

Sign up

Matthew Scully

The New York Times

Ruth Wedgwood

The Wall Street Journal