George Will Is Not Impressed

As I indicated Friday, George Will had a column this weekend that didn't beat around the Bush (pun intended) when it came to Harriet Miers. Here's the link, and it starts like this:

Defending The Indefensible

Such is the perfect perversity of the nomination of Harriet Miers that it discredits, and even degrades, all who toil at justifying it. Many of their justifications cannot be dignified as arguments. Of those that can be, some reveal a deficit of constitutional understanding commensurate with that which it is, unfortunately, reasonable to impute to Miers. Other arguments betray a gross misunderstanding of conservatism on the part of persons masquerading as its defenders.

With an opening like that, you kind of know where he's going to go next. At the end of the piece he does some math, and has something to say about the supporters and detractors:

Can Miers's confirmation be blocked? It is easy to get a senatorial majority to take a stand in defense of this or that concrete interest, but it is surpassingly difficult to get a majority anywhere to rise in defense of mere excellence.

Still, Miers must begin with 22 Democratic votes against her. Surely no Democrat can retain a shred of self-respect if, having voted against John Roberts, he or she then declares Miers fit for the court. All Democrats who so declare will forfeit a right and an issue -- their right to criticize the administration's cronyism.

And Democrats, with their zest for gender politics, need this reminder: To give a woman a seat on a crowded bus because she is a woman is gallantry. To give a woman a seat on the Supreme Court because she is a woman is a dereliction of senatorial duty. It also is an affront to mature feminism, which may bridle at gallantry but should recoil from condescension.

As for Republicans, any who vote for Miers will thereafter be ineligible to argue that it is important to elect Republicans because they are conscientious conservers of the judicial branch's invaluable dignity. Finally, any Republican senator who supinely acquiesces in President Bush's reckless abuse of presidential discretion -- or who does not recognize the Miers nomination as such -- can never be considered presidential material.

This morning on Fox Bill Kristol said he's not even sure the nomination will make it to the hearings, and may be withdrawn before it becomes even more embarrassing. I kind of doubt that, but right now there's no way she has the votes for confirmation (Chuckie Schumer agrees, which is a little scary since he and I rarely agree on anything). We'll see what happens.

UPDATE: Jonah Goldberg of National Review has come out against Miers. Hugh Hewitt is still valiantly defending the nomination, but I'm beginning to think he's trying to fight off incoming missiles with a flyswatter. Good luck with all that.

TTLB is running a blog poll on the nomination, and in keeping with that poll, at this point I oppose the Miers nomination.