So Bush has nominated Harriet Miers (once his personal lawyer) to the Supreme Court despite the glaring fact that she has no judicial experience. While this is an obvious problem, I’m even more troubled by his defense of Ms. Miers–that she was the best person he could find because she is a staunch conservative and will not change her views. Before John Roberts was nominated, wasn’t everyone saying that the court had to get a non-partisan judge, someone who would represent the best interests of the entire country? Now, Bush is openly using her identification as a conservative as a reason why she should be confirmed.

It’s not just the idea that she’s overtly conservative that worries me. Bush also keeps saying that she will not change her views, that she’ll be voting the same way in twenty years as she is now. People should be open to changing their minds, especially in the chaotic present. Do you know who else is famous for refusing to change his political views? Bush himself, who wouldn’t admit his obvious fault or do anything about the Iraq war after it became crystal clear that the invasion was unjust and an absolutely terrible idea.

Then there’s the increasingly popular word “cronyism.” Bush admits that he and Miers have known each other for a long time. Doesn’t that make it hard for him to be impartial? Her lack of experience adds to the reasonable suspicions that are arising. All of this, along with Bush’s assurance that she will always vote conservative, makes it easy to believe that Bush is pushing for her because she has simply agreed to be a rubber stamp for the far right for as long as she’s in the Court.

It’s not as if anyone expected Bush to make a fair, non-partisan decision to nominate a judge who would necessarily be qualified, but the fact that Miers is so blatantly none of these only shows Bush’s arrogant disregard and disrespect for the American government more than ever.