Some conservatives are pounding President Bush for his nomination of Harriet E. Miers to the Supreme Court. They worry that “her selection was a betrayal of years of struggle to move the court to the right,” according to the Washington Post. This is an overstatement and a reluctance to admit that Dubya’s move is just good politics.

In a meeting yesterday between conservative advocates and White House aides, things got pretty heated:

At one point in the first of the two off-the-record sessions, according to several people in the room, White House adviser Ed Gillespie suggested that some of the unease about Miers “has a whiff of sexism and a whiff of elitism.” Irate participants erupted and demanded that he take it back. Gillespie later said he did not mean to accuse anyone in the room but “was talking more broadly” about criticism of Miers.

I would urge the Right’s activists to step back and let Dubya do his thing. Whether the latest criticism of Bush is warranted or not, the reality is that he needs some good politics now — some fence-mending, if you will.

From the BBC,

Mr Bush could have picked a hardcore conservative in an attempt to reach out to core supporters at a time when his national approval ratings are at record lows, and the Republican Party itself is reeling from scandals surrounding two of its leading members.

Yet he appears to have reached out to the middle ground - by picking a woman to replace a woman - and by consulting with Democrats, some of whom suggested her as a potential candidate.

Ms Miers is an unusual Supreme Court nominee in that she is the first for more than 30 years not to have been a judge.

One administration official said some senators from both parties thought it was important for Bush to “think outside the Appeals Court” by picking someone who could offer a different perspective on the job.

Let Bush reach out to the Left and the American people as a whole. The Right got who they wanted for Supreme Court chief justice, John G. Roberts Jr. The United States government was designed to favor consensus.

While Miers has never been a judge, her appointment is not without precedent. As to the claims that she is not qualified for the Supreme Court, Miers has an impressive resume. For example,

* In 1985, Miers was selected as the first woman to become president of the Dallas Bar Association.

* In 1992, she became the first woman elected president of the State Bar of Texas. Miers served as the president of the State Bar of Texas from 1992 to 1993.

* From 1995 until 2000, Miers served as chairwoman of the Texas Lottery Commission, a voluntary public service position she undertook while maintaining her legal practice and other responsibilities. When then-Governor Bush appointed Miers to a six-year term on the Texas Lottery Commission, it was mired in scandal, and she served as a driving force behind its cleanup.

And just as a justice who was expected to be conservative can end up being a moderate, the opposite is also possible. This is the beauty of the Founding Fathers’ checks and balances.

When the Supreme Court made a controversial property rights decision earlier this year, three “conservative” justices dissented (William H. Rehnquist, Antonin Scalia, and Clarence Thomas). A left-wing cookie-cutter analysis of this decision would have had these “conservatives” voting for big business, not against it.

I predict that Miers will eventually be confirmed, but not without the usual political ruckus. Dubya is doing the right thing.