More about the Harriet Miers nomination to the USSC.

In the excerpt below, conservative Patrick Buchanan comes out against the nomination.

In addition, I want to point out the following for some thoughtful centrist analysis by a poster at DailyKos: Harriet Miers, one day later. The poster talks about how Miers seems to be getting sold through personal approaches to conservative Senators by Bush advisor Karl Rove and others, and many conservatives remain disappointed that Bush did not select a well-known conservative jurist. Moreover, no one really knows for sure how Miers will be on the court, whether a textualist or another kind of judicial thinker. Bush appointed his personal friend rather than a well-known jurist, and in doing so has risked fracturing his supporters. All in all, a thoughtful commentary and worth a look.

Below is an excerpt from the Buchanan opposition article.

HUMAN EVENTS ONLINE :: Miers’ Qualifications Are ‘Non-Existent’ by Patrick J. Buchanan

The Nomination of Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court Miers’ Qualifications Are ‘Non-Existent’

Handed a once-in-a-generation opportunity to return the Supreme Court to constitutionalism, George W. Bush passed over a dozen of the finest jurists of his day — to name his personal lawyer.

In a decision deeply disheartening to those who invested such hopes in him, Bush may have tossed away his and our last chance to roll back the social revolution imposed upon us by our judicial dictatorship since the days of Earl Warren.

This is not to disparage Harriet Miers. From all accounts, she is a gracious lady who has spent decades in the law and served ably as Bush’s lawyer in Texas and, for a year, as White House counsel.

But her qualifications for the Supreme Court are non-existent.

. . .