Rumors are circulating that Miers is on the verge of withdrawing her nomination (or the White House is on the verge of withdrawing it for her). She is incompetent, a crony, and completely unqualified for the job. But I'm torn over her possible withdrawal.

It seems like the right thing to do. A seat on the Supreme Court is a lifetime position and should be filled by the brightest legal minds the country has to offer. I'm not accusing Miers of being unintelligent, but with no previous judicial experience, there are obviously several more qualified candidates.

But, do I want her to withdraw? Conservatives, particularly the religious right, are Miers' loudest detractors and the ones calling for her withdrawal. Why? Because they think Miers' isn't conservative enough. They want a conservative judicial activist who will work towards overturning Roe v. Wade and obviating legalized gay marrige.

I read a conservative blogger (sorry, don't remember which one) who hypothesized that Miers was an intentional diversion by Bush. The theory was, after Miers was rejected for being unqualified, Bush could nominate a rabid conservative, but a qualified rabid conservative, and the Senate would pass him/her.

This theory is illogical, considering most of Miers opposition has come from conservatives. But it raises an interesting point about the following nominee. Odds are, the followup nominee will be much more socially conservative than Miers. Bush will have to appease the religious right, and there is a strong chance the followup nominee will be more conservative (and more of a judicial activist) than Miers or Roberts.

But in the choice between incompetence and fanatacism, I think I must go with incompetence. Because anyone can learn a new job if its guaranteed for life.