Whether it was an accident, or a sheer stroke of genius, the historical record of what nominating Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court will mean to the nation may look very different than what most liberals would like to see.
For the last five weeks, the Chuck Schumers and Pat Leahys of the universe have driven to their Georgetown brownstones and chuckled to themselves as to how the conservatives in America could have ended up in such disarray. Over cocktails, you could see the arrogance slipping into the conversation. They believed themselves to be watching the self-destruction of the conservative unity that had re-elected George Bush with an average increase of 4 percent for Bush in every county in the nation. And the best thing of all: The GOP was doing it to themselves.
But consider a different possibility ...
The nation as much as sleepwalked through the nomination and confirmation of John Roberts. Roberts himself was much a clone of the justice he ended up replacing on the nation's highest court, former Chief Justice Rehnquist.
Conservatives also knew that Republicans like John McCain and the gang of 14 had, in essence, handcuffed the president with the last-minute compromise that avoided the filibuster confrontation that so many of us wanted to see happen. The gang also threatened future filibusters on any nominee who was deemed "extraordinary" in terms of the controversy surrounding them.
When President Bush nominated Miers – whether by accident or strategy – he set up a chain reaction of events that for the past several weeks have made liberals breathe easy and get cocky, and angered the grass roots who were so passionate in electing the president. (And for many, that passion was focused no where else more strongly than on the court system.)
But that anger will now serve a useful purpose.
As the public has more or less ignored the political process in recent months, President Bush has needed to do something to shift the dynamic to more or less hear a "demand" from the public for a strong originalist, constitutionalist nominee who would, in fact, be confirmed in the Senate and leave a lasting imprint on the Court.
With all of the same cast of characters calling for this judge or that, and the base still asleep, liberals would have felt empowered. They would get to frame the real issues surrounding the debate as to what a constitutional justice looked like.
However, because conservatives have been loud, argumentative and insistent, the debate has automatically swung into their realm of discussion. They have dominated the discussion on what qualifications a judge should have, and why an articulation of a judicial philosophy that would eventually overturn Roe vs. Wade, protect the sanctity of marriage, and preserve the right of property owners to not be summarily displaced by economic opportunists is not only good, but necessary.
Liberals won't give up now, but the fight will be much harder because of the education the public has received in hearing the debate over Miers.
Now Miers goes back to what she did before, vetting, screening and recommending those who should serve on the courts. The list of nominees she had helped put forward prior to her nomination was stellar – and we have no reason to doubt that her future work will not still reflect that excellent quality. But by having been nominated and walked through the process as far as she did before withdrawing, America has had the chance to deepen its understanding of why a conservative justice is the right way to go.
The grass roots is asleep no longer. Instead they are ready to work, march and fight for a Supreme Court nominee who will be stellar, brilliant and able to send the "Gang of 14" and Senate liberals running for cover when the hearings begin.
Â