As I mentioned, Polistra has been resting, but I knew sooner or later she'd have an opinion that needs to be expressed.....
It's quite possible that Miers will turn out to be Constitutionally literate, and thus quite possible that the initial response of conservatives will turn out to be prejudicial. But why does Bush go through this? Why does he please Schumer and Reid instead of giving his would-be supporters a reason to cheer? It's a terrible tactic.
Going back to cars again:
Joe Frazer was the real heavyweight of American salesmen. He worked for most of the carmakers and left a legacy in each case. Joe named the Plymouth; Joe invented modern car financing in the form of GMAC, which has become the only solvent part of GM. In 1950, Joe was the Frazer in Kaiser-Frazer, a partnership that took over the ruins of Graham to produce a new postwar car. Responding to Nash's Rambler, Kaiser introduced its own compact, but unfortunately Henry J. Kaiser wasn't listening to Joe Frazer's advice. Joe quit in disgust, and the 'Henry J' went nowhere.
Later, speaking to auto historians, Joe diagnosed the problem. Lacking Rambler's puppyish perkiness, the Henry J was just ugly, looking like a big car that had been squished in a vise. Even worse, it didn't have a trunk opening or a glove compartment, and its interior looked austere and uninviting.
"I would have brought her out all dressed up and stripped her down later."
Now I'm not advising -- or even imagining, heaven forbid -- a lap dance by Harriet, but things would have gone so much better if Bush had brought her out all dressed up with citations and quotations to prove her literacy.
On Miers's religion: Apparently she belongs to some variant of the Churches of Christ. Not entirely clear from her home church's website exactly where it falls in the Campbellite spectrum, but looks closer to the Church of Christ category as opposed to the Disciples of Christ category. I'm familiar with both types; for a while in high school, came perilously close to joining the C of C, and my alma mater (Phillips Univ, now sadly defunct) was D of C. Even now, if I should somehow miraculously gain the ability to believe, I'd probably go with C of C. Among all the Protestant groups claiming to be originalist, the C of C feels closest to plain pure New Testament Christianity. The only oddity is their insistence on singing without instruments, which isn't really forced by the Bible. But every denomination needs a 'brand symbol', and this has become the C of C's brand. I think it also tends to keep them humble and simple in the best sense of both words.
The Disciples have gone in a different direction: though they still claim to be fundamentalist, in fact they are much closer to the socially-leftist Mainline churches like Methodists, and even considered merging with Methodists at one time. There is a more recent split within the D of C, with some churches sliding back toward the New Testament, but not adopting a-capella singing. None of the Campbellite churches are remotely charismatic or Pentecostal; all would consider manifestations like healing and tongues to be extraneous at best.