WSJ not keen on Miers

Things aren't looking any better for Harriet Miers, between her lackluster (to say the least) response to the Senate questionnaire and inability to find anything positive to say for herself. And the right still isn't buying it. Let's just hope we don't see any defenses from the left based on the idea that "she might surprise everyone" and go progressive. Let her sink, people. How much luckier could we get in not having to risk all to block a nomination ourselves?

The Supreme Court nominee praised as "meticulous" and "detail-oriented" had to admit on her Senate Judiciary Committee questionnaire that she had been suspended from the District of Columbia bar because she'd forgotten to pay her dues. And then, in a follow-up letter, she had to admit that she'd forgotten to mention in her Senate Judiciary Committee questionnaire that she'd also been suspended from the Texas bar after having forgotten to pay dues there. Embarrassing.

What was her qualification for the Supreme Court again?

In an editorial today, the Wall Street Journal declares that George W. Bush's second Supreme Court nomination has proved to be a "political blunder of the first order." The Journal stops short of calling on Bush to withdraw Miers' nomination -- maybe she will "prove to be such a sterling Senate witness that she can still win confirmation" -- but it says that Miers is already suffering from the perception, "fairly or not," that she is "simply not able to discuss the Constitutional controversies that have animated American political debate for two generations."