Columnist George Will goes for the gut shot here:
It is not important that she be confirmed because there is no evidence that she is among the leading lights of American jurisprudence, or that she possesses talents commensurate with the Supreme Court’s tasks. The president’s “argument” for her amounts to: Trust me. There is no reason to, for several reasons.
He has neither the inclination nor the ability to make sophisticated judgments about competing approaches to construing the Constitution. Few presidents acquire such abilities in the course of their prepresidential careers, and this president, particularly, is not disposed to such reflections.
Funny thing is, there’s no way to gauge the conversation. Some conservative groups have thrown in the towel, others are adamantly opposing Miers outright.
What I would like to see during any Senate confirmation hearing is for Miers to throw out a few punches. Show us you’re the Scalia or Thomas we were promised by the president, and let the Dems give us everything they have.
At some point, the national discussion about jurisprudence, what it is, and what we want to see from a justice should begin. I don’t think we got that from Roberts’ nomination. We deserve one with Miers.