Buds

Digby and others are wondering about Harriet Miers.

She's been Bush's personal lawyer for some time which means that she will have a conflict of interest on a number of cases over the next three years. Digby wonders if she'll recuse herself, comparing her to Abe Fortas who didn't when Johnson was President.

I think a more important aspect of this cronyism is that this is precisely why she was appointed. Bush is putting an insurance policy on the Supreme Court. By appointing someone with unquestioned loyalty, he insures a majority of support on the Court should anything go wrong in his administration (read court fights associated with Presidential investigations). An uproar over her lack of recusal, even if she obviously should, doesn't trouble Bush and certainly won't trouble Miers given her lifetime appointment.

Everyone needs a little insurance once in awhile. However, strange things happen when people get a lifetime appointment. We shall see.

UPDATE: Something else hit me. Bush has to believe in the ultimate ability for the unqualified to rise to high office. Right? So is it any surprise he'd choose Miers?