A few days ago, Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers essentially failed a Senate questionnaire that was considered a formality. But, according to Senate Judiciary Committee members, her answers were so "inadequate," "insufficient," and "insulting" that they had to send the form back for a do-over. To add to that pathetic embarrassment, some of what she did say was a baffling misstatement Constitutional law. Ive never been to law school and I think I might be able to take this woman on in a debate. If you were up for a seat on the Supreme Court and were answering the first official questions from the Senate that will hold your fate in its hands...don't you think you would, oh, answer the questions completely and then make sure that what you were saying was correct?

"At one point, Miers described her service on the Dallas City Council in 1989. When the city was sued on allegations that it violated the Voting Rights Act, she said, "the council had to be sure to comply with the proportional representation requirement of the Equal Protection Clause."

But the Supreme Court repeatedly has said the Constitution's guarantee of "equal protection of the laws" does not mean that city councils or state legislatures must have the same proportion of blacks, Latinos and Asians as the voting population.

"That's a terrible answer. There is no proportional representation requirement under the equal protection clause," said New York University law professor Burt Neuborne, a voting rights expert. "If a first-year law student wrote that and submitted it in class, I would send it back and say it was unacceptable."

Stanford law professor Pamela Karlan, also an expert on voting rights, said she was surprised the White House did not check Miers' questionnaire before sending it to the Senate.

"Are they trying to set her up? Any halfway competent junior lawyer could have checked the questionnaire and said it cannot go out like that. I find it shocking," she said."

Hell, in Mobile v. Bolden, the Supreme Court outright stated, "The Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment does not require proportional representation as an imperative of political organization."

I keep waiting for some sliver of information that is going to make me support (or at least tolerate) the thought of this woman on the Supreme Court.

__________________

Well, when you're a cronie of the president, you don't necessarily have to know jack shit. Besides, what did you expect from Curious George?

ZO, did you see SNL last week? As to Miers- there has to be someone out there more capable then her. If they want to try to bring the Supreme Court into the 21st century by having a woman take over, fine, but get one that at least knows what she's doing.

__________________

Yeah, the Miers skit was great. Rachel Dratch looked just like Miers!

From FoxNews.com:

Harriet Miers withdrew her nomination to be a U.S. Supreme Court justice Thursday in the face of strong criticism from President Bush's most conservative supporters, who say she doesn't have the qualifications or experience necessary to serve on the nation's highest court.

Miers, who President Bush had nominated in the beginning of the month to replace retiring Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, notified Bush on Wednesday night about her decision and delivered a letter to him dated Thursday.

In her letter, she blamed her withdrawal on Senate demands for release of internal White House documents in advance of her confirmation hearings.

"I have been greatly honored and humbled by the confidence that you have shown in me, and have appreciated immensely your support and the support of many others. However, I am concerned that the confirmation process presents a burden for the White House and our staff that is not in the best interest of the country," Miers wrote.

"As you know, members of the Senate have indicated their intention to seek documents about my service in the White House in order to judge whether to support me. I have been informed repeatedly that in lieu of records, I would be expected to testify about my service in the White House to demonstrate my experience and judicial philosophy," she wrote.

[...]

Among the names floated to replace Miers have been appeals court judges Michael Luttig, Edith Jones, Priscilla Owen and Janice Rogers Brown, all prized by conservatives but who could face significant opposition by Democratic senators who appeared willing to give Miers a shot.

For the full story click here.

Thats one idiot down, now lets hope they make a better choice the next time around.

__________________