It slays me that some ultra conservative groups are opposing Harriet Miers' appointment to the supreme court based solely on lack of evidence that she would overturn Roe v. Wade. Doesn't it make more sense to oppose her appointment based on the fact that she has no record AT ALL and has never been a judge a day in her life?
The last critical failure of an appointed person based on lack of experience was waaaaaay back in... gosh, you have to go all the way back to September. Ah, cronyism. Isn't it great?
I go on record in opposition of her appointment because of the name Harriet.*
*And THAT'S coming from a person who had a Grandma Blanch. God rest her soul, miss you Grandma.