The Roberts Trap

A very interesting bit of analysis by Nathan Tabor, which I found over on the US Newswire:

Such are the quagmires created by conservatives when they are too easily appeased. Why should we support any nominee whose positions on vital moral issues are too vague?

Grassroots conservatives realized the ruse immediately and were quick to express their outrage over the latest "stealth" nominee on talk radio and the hottest blog spots. Almost as immediately, the White House went into damage-control mode, assuring conservatives they had nothing to fear because Miers is not a "stealth" candidate to the president—after all, he knows her. The president even held a hastily prepared press conference in the Rose Garden to assuage conservative angst.

After almost 60 minutes of questions and answers, if conservatives cut through the spin and posturing, they are left to ponder this still unanswered question: Exactly how is Miers -- or even Roberts -- in the mold of Scalia or Thomas? After all, the president's campaign promise to conservatives was to select judges who were just like Justices Thomas and Scalia.

In his own words, the president offered, "I picked the best person I could find." With all due respect Mr. President, where were you looking? I don't have the considerable resources that the White House had in this search, but off the top of my head come the names of Edith Hollan Jones from the U.S. Court of Appeals, 5th Circuit, and Janice Rogers Brown from the U.S. Court of Appeals, D.C. Circuit. Jones, who has been on the court since 1985, could easily establish her conservative credentials. Brown, who recently proved she can handle the Senate confirmation process, has been a judge since 1994 and her life story embodies the conservative mindset for success. That may not make her a "trailblazer" to some, but her judicial record clearly trumps that of Ms. Miers.

The president seemed to bristle at the assertion that Miers is a stealth candidate or that her appointment was due to her close relationship with him, but when pressed for reasons why she should be supported, he offered only variations of this idea: She helped picked Roberts, she knows what he's looking for in a judge, and because he knows her, he can assure us that she is the kind of judge he's looking for.

That seems less an assurance and more like circular logic that no one benefits from. Grassroots conservatives deserve far better from this president.

I'm not one to make the Janice Rogers Brown versus Harriet Miers argument... I think that the bigger issue is the bit about who the president promised to nominate. Throw in the fact, that the debate on moving the SCOTUS to the right has been deflected to a discussion on cronyism, elitism, and various other -isms.