The fake-out?

Reactions are everywhere today around the blogosphere regarding the nomination of Harriet Miers and Sandra Day O'Connors replacement to the SCOTUS.

Most of the right-wing blogs have been having predominantly negative reactions. As usual, the best roundup of links is over at Instapundit. The consensus among the right wingers is...'WHY?'. Why someone who's credentials don't match up to the standards of John Roberts, or at least higher standards than most other lawyers around the country, with the exception of being White House Counsel. Why not someone with better conservative credentials?

Some think its the 'ole Bush fakeout. That position worries me as maybe she is a hidden 'wingnut'. Right now, no one knows. Crony-ism is the cry and everyone is just in a wait and see pattern. Some are down-right angry and some are calling this a win for the Democrats.

Myself, having supported the Roberts nomination, I'm going to wait and see and withhold opinion. My first thought this morning however was this...how can you nominate someone who has NEVER been a judge to the highest judicial seat in the land? I know its been done before, but it boggles my mind. I don't care how qualified a lawyer that person is (and from the readings today, Miers is qualified, but certainly not exceptional)--no judicial experience strikes me as a little preposterous.

The cynical side of me thinks one of two things. First, as I stated earlier, maybe she is extremely socially conservative and Bush really is doing exactly what I thought he would--pleasing the social right (they just don't know it yet); or secondly by picking someone who for lac of a better term could be coined as 'benign' perhaps Bush and the rest of the administration know something we don't. Is there some really negative news coming out in the not too distant future that will weaken the President in a tough confirmation battle?

Wait and see. For breaking news (if any) on Miers positions, go to the SCOTUSblog as always.