AddieStan

Your blogstress does not recall having ever heard a more political acceptance speech for a Supreme Court nominee than we heard today from politician Harriet Miers. Her comment regarding her "appreciation for the role of the legislative branch" was hardly a subtle signal to the president's right flank that she's on the same page with the Justice Sunday crowd, who would like to get the Supreme Court out of the constitutional interpretation business once and for all. Here's the money question for Harriet Miers in her confirmation hearing: Do you believe that Marbury v. Madison--the landmark 19th-century case that determined the court's obligation to interpret the Constitution--was correctly decided?

As an occasional propagandist, your blogstress wincingly questions the president's choice of White House Counsel Harriet Miers for the Supreme Court. (Your Webwench, however, has not been named to the Supreme Court, despite her womanly wisdom. Alas, no bustier will lurk under the High Court's black robes--at least as far as we know--right, Nino?). With no judicial experience to recommend her, journos and pontificators have only Ms. Miers's political record to regard in assessing her qualifications for the high court, and it bodes not well so far--unless one is comfortable with a spin doctor on the Big Bench. Here's Miers in an online discussion on WhiteHouse.gov , almost a year ago, back when Miers was President Bush's Deputy Chief of Staff for Domestic Policy: James, from Mountain View, CA writes: Are we better off now than we were four years ago? Harriet Miers: Thanks, James, this is a very good question, and I am pleased to give you my views. What we did not kn...