To clarify the precise form this will take ... so that my reader will know what to expect ... the President will not say he is withdrawing the nomination.

Instead, the nominee will withdraw her name from consideration "over the President's objections" (wink, wink).

My dear friends and loyal readers, my apologies for a prolonged silence.

Work responsibilities and other unfortunate intrusions have interfered with my ability to provide ongoing authoritative coverage of the Harriet Miers controversy.

With every passing day the conservative unrest intensifies, causing me (if I may say so) to marvel at my own prescience in the Squid Viewer's Guide.

I dare say that for the next Supreme Court nomination, the Squid Viewer's Guide will be considered must reading for White House staffers and all 100 senators ... not to mention the President and First Lady themselves.

But I digress ...

I have emerged from my cocoon of silence to issue another astonishingly accurate prediction:

Mortimus Squid's Astonishingly Accurate Prediction #3:

The nomination of Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court will be withdrawn prior to the confirmation hearings.

The pick has been a political disaster from beginning to end.

I am now willing to throw my considerable reputation in the balance to predict that, though the President would rather ingest nails than withdraw the nomination, he will soon be forced to do so.

Incidentally, please remove my Astonishingly Accurate Prediction #2 (that Karen Williams will be the Supreme Court pick) from whatever trash container to which you may have consigned it.

And stay tuned....

Dear readers, did I not predict (on the Squid Viewer's Guide) that if the President chose Harriet Miers there would be open revolt by conservatives?

This has indeed happened, as anyone following the news may ascertain.

The more cynical reader, who misinterprets the above as boasting on my part, might wish to remind me of my Karen Williams prediction, which turned out to be somewhat less than completely accurate.

The time is not yet to do penance for my allegedly failed prediction ... as there remains a possibility, albeit slight, that the current nomination will be withdrawn. In that case, Williams remains a strong choice.

But here we are now ... Miss Miers has been nominated.  The White House is desperately trying to quell the conservative rebellion. Some conservatives are calling for the nomination to be withdrawn.

Other conservative leaders, such as James Dobson and Jay Sekulow, have come out in support of Miss Miers.

I must say that Dr. Dobson on his Wednesday broadcast sounded like a man who had just chosen between two pills and was desperately hoping it was the medicine and not the poison.

My position is this:  The nomination is an exceeding poor one. Whether the nominee is a poor one, remains yet to be seen.

I mean this:

The very fact that the President's conservative base is fractured and disheartened shows the folly of the pick.

(Is it to be believed that neither the President nor his advisors had the Squid Viewer's Guide in front of them in making this decision? Such a thought stretches credulity.)

Yes, this was bungled badly.  The need of the hour was a nominee clearly in the mold of Justices Thomas and Scalia.  Instead we have an enigma with no judicial record.

Yet there is some hope that Miss Miers could turn out to our liking.

She is by all accounts an evangelical Chrisian ...  a dedicated member of a conservative church. 

She is almost certainly personally pro-life to one degree or another.

But there are cross-signals.

To those who might be tempted to see her as a Dobson-style Christian conservative, I would note that she was a member (indeed the Chairman) of the Texas Lottery Commission prior to joining the President in Washington.

Not to judge her heart in the matter, but I don't know any committed, conservative evangelical Christian who would touch such a thing with a ten-foot pole.  Do you, my dear reader?

Also, in the late 1990's, as a member of the advisory board for Southern Methodist University's law school, Ms. Miers strongly pushed for the creation of an endowed lecture series in women's studies.

She must have known that a lecture series in women's studies at a liberal university would become a playground for radical, anti-family feminists.  And so it has.

It is difficult to know what to make of these things.

The President surely believes that she will take a conservative view of constitutional interpretation ... but there is no record to establish this.

Sigh ... and on it goes ... a string of question marks at a time and place where the stakes are too high for question marks.

As much as it pains me to be in opposition to one who is very likely a sister in Christ ... it is my considered view that unless and until solid evidence can be provided that Miss Miers is a constitutional conservative, the nomination should be opposed.

Dear friends ... there is a maxim I was taught in childhood that has worked its way into the finely-wrought tapestry of my character:

"Think first; speak second."

I will soon be in a position to issue substantive comments on the Harriet Miers nomination ... including a revision of her rating on the Squid Scale of Judicial Conservatism to comport with the increased information now available.

I realize that many readers, including no doubt some in the White House and the halls of Congress, are eagerly awaiting my pronouncements on the matter.

Lesser commentators, who do not have multitudes hanging upon their counsel, have already fully vented for or against the nomination.

I, recognizing my weighty influence, have held my fire in favor of pursuing further information.

An authoritative analysis is soon forthcoming.

In the meantime, may I suggest a look at this fascinating article about Miss Miers' pro-life credentials ... which includes this notable fragment:

As political activists rush to mine Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers' slender public record, a former campaign manager says she opposed abortion rights while running for Dallas City Council in 1989.

"She is on the extreme end of the anti-choice movement," said Lorlee Bartos, who managed Ms. Miers' first and only political campaign and said they discussed abortion once during the race.

"I think Harriet's belief was pretty strongly felt," Ms. Bartos said Monday. "I suspect she is of the same cloth as the president"....

Ms. Bartos said Ms. Miers was supportive of abortion rights in her youth. She said Ms. Miers then underwent "a born-again, profound experience" that caused her to oppose abortion.

Tony Perkins at the Family Research Council, a leading Christian conservative group, has refused to immediately endorse the President's choice:

President Bush has long made it clear that his choices for the U.S. Supreme Court would be in the mold of current justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas. We have no reason to believe he has abandoned that standard. However, our lack of knowledge about Harriet Miers, and the absence of a record on the bench, give us insufficient information from which to assess whether or not she is indeed in that mold.

In the days to come, Harriet Miers will have the chance to demonstrate such a philosophy. We will be watching closely as the confirmation process begins, and we urge American families to wait and see if the confidence we have always placed in the President’s commitment is justified by this selection.

Focus on the Family's James Dobson has given a cautious thumbs up to Harriet Miers ... he sounds a bit underwhelmed.

We welcome the president's nomination of Harriet Miers to the U.S. Supreme Court. He pledged emphatically during his campaign to appoint judges who will interpret the law rather than create it. He also promised to select competent judges who will 'not use the bench to write social policy.' To this point, President Bush's appointments to the federal bench appear to have been remarkably consistent with that stated philosophy. Based on the information known generally about Harriet Miers, and President Bush's personal knowledge of her, we believe that she will not prove to be a lone exception.

On the other hand, one cannot know absolutely about matters of integrity and philosophy until a jurist is given the tremendous power and influence of their position. As Lord Acton said: 'Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.' Sadly, that seems to have happened to Justices Souter and Kennedy. All we can say now is that Harriet Miers appears to be an outstanding nominee for the Supreme Court.

We look forward to learning more about her at the confirmation hearings.

So far no reaction from James Dobson at Focus on the Family.

His response will be crucial, and he knows it.

I suspect he is like everyone else right now ... trying to find out more about Harriet Miers.

Yes, as I predicted, the conservative base is up in arms.

Here is a nominee included on a list of names suggested by Democratic leader Harry Reid.

A nominee called "mainstream" by liberal Senator Charles Schumer ... to whom mainstream means somewhere to the left of Karl Marx.

Yes, she gave a political contribution to Al Gore in 1988.

All the same, I would join those who are suggesting caution in our response.

There will be plenty of time to vent feelings and frustrations over the next few weeks as more facts come out.

For one thing, there are reports of an evangelical conversion in Miss Miers life in fairly recent years.

Miss Miers is apparently a sister in Christ, and for that reason alone, I do not feel inclined to join the all-out assault against her. 

There is some interesting ... and partly encouraging information here.

My friends, President Bush has chosen Harriet Miers to replace Sandra Day O'Connor on the Supreme Court.

The conservative, pro-life blogosphere is stunned and incredulous.

In the Squid Viewer's Guide, I warned that if the President were so foolish as to choose someone from Group E, conservatives would feel betrayed and openly revolt.

Allow me to pass along some comments from ConfirmThem.com.  I gleaned these from just the first fifty comments on a single thread:

"I’m through with the Republicans."

"I have been a lifelong Republican. I quit. This is truly embarassing." 

"There is absolutely no way to justify this pick. I am sick to my stomach."

"All the work and effort to get this man elected and I feel as if I have just been stabbed in the back."

"I may not vote democratic, but I am not going to vote Republican either. Bush is on his own. This opportunity comes around once in a lifetime and he threw it away."

"I sincerely hope the GOP gets a big, hard slap in the face next November."

"This pick actually borders on the criminal."

"NO MORE MONEY FOR REPUBLICANS!!"

"I regard Bush’s selection as a betrayal of the highest order."

"I am profoundly disappointed." 

Some conservatives are pleading that we find out more about Miers before rushing to judgment ... but on the face of it, this appears to be a pick breathtaking for its stupidity.

More later.

Over at ConfirmThem.com, Erick's White House source is saying tonight that the announcement will be tomorrow and he thinks it will be either Michael Luttig or Karen Williams.

If true, this is good news for conservatives.  These are the two most conservative judges on the most conservative Circuit Court in the nation (Fourth Circuit).

Luttig is more a favorite with conservatives, as the Squid Viewer's Guide below indicates.

Williams supporters point out that she almost always comes down on the same side as Luttig and on some cases has taken a more conservative position.

Then again, this could be a White House head fake ... the nominee could be neither of the two.

The Squid Viewer's Guide

to the Supreme Court Announcement

An announcement is expected early next week.

The following list includes practically every name prominently mentioned in connection with the current Supreme Court opening.

President Bush takes pleasure in being unpredictable, so it is possible he could pick someone totally off the radar screen.  If that happens, please tune to the Mortimus Squid blog for expert and timely analysis.

For each potential nominee I have included a rating on Squid's Scale of Judicial Conservatism. (Note that in a few cases, the rating has been revised from previous ratings assigned on this site.)

Group A:  Conservative Firebrands Almost Certain to Overturn Roe v. Wade

If the President picks someone from Group A:  Conservatives go apoplectic with joy ... the Republican base is unbelievably energized ... Liberals go apoplectic with rage ... World War III in the Senate ... Democrat filibuster is almost certain ... Republicans try to employ the "nuclear" option of changing Senate rules to eliminate the filibuster ... confirmation will be a squeaker.

Janice Rogers Brown - 9.0

Edith Hollan Jones - 9.0

Emilio Garza - 8.75 (Revised upward)

William Pryor - 8.75

Group B:  Staunch Conservatives Almost Certain to Overturn Roe v. Wade

If the President picks someone from this list:  Conservatives rejoice ... the Republican base is energized ... liberals gear up for serious battle. All of these would likely be confirmed, depending on how the hearings go ... Democratic filibuster is very possible, but not certain.

Samuel Alito - 8.75

J. Michael Luttig - 8.75

Maura Corrigan - 8.5

Group C:  Solid Conservatives Likely to Overturn Roe v. Wade

If the President picks someone from Group C:  Some conservatives are very happy ... others complain a bit ... but most rally behind the nominee.  The Republican base is neither energized nor angered. Liberals gear up for serious battle.  Confirmation is very likely. Democratic filibuster chances are about 50/50.

Alice Batchelder - 8.25 (Almost belongs in Group B)

Michael McConnell - 8.0 (Has spoken against Roe, but is a bit unpredictable)

Karen Williams - 8.0 (Revised upward)

Danny Boggs - 8.0

Raoul Cantero - 7.75

Miguel Estrada - 8.0 

Priscilla Owen - 7.5 (Revised downward)

Senator John Cornyn - 7.5

Diane Sykes - 7.75

Frank Easterbrook - 7.75

Group D:  Probably Conservative but Risky

If the President picks someone from Group D:  Conservatives grumble but may not openly revolt. These picks depress rather than energize the Republican social conservative base. Liberals gear up for serious battle (or at least pretend to). These would almost certainly be confirmed without a filibuster.

Larry Thompson - 7.25

Edith Brown Clement - 7.5

Senator Mel Martinez - 7.5

Group E:  Blank Slates and Moderates

If the President picks someone from Group E:  Conservatives feel betrayed and openly revolt ... the 2006 elections will be a bloodbath for the Republicans.  Liberals will pretend to gear up for serious battle, but inwardly will be thanking their lucky stars (since most don't believe in a Diety).  These could face more of a challenge from conservatives than from the Democrats.

Harriet Miers - 6.0

Alberto Gonzales - 6.75

Consuelo Callahan - 6.0

Maureen Mahoney - 6.0

ConfirmThem.com has emerged as the primary on-line clearinghouse of Supreme Court rumors.

To save my dear readers the bother of sifting through dozens of posts and hundreds of comments (some by commenters claiming inside sources) ... here are the hot names at the moment ... including their rating on the acclaimed Squid Scale of Judicial Conservatism:

Maura Corrigan - 57 year old Michigan Supreme Court judge. Considered very conservative ... in this article, she cites approvingly Justice Scalia's views on legal interpretation.  Rating on Squid Scale 8.5 (when all is said and done, could be a 9.0).  If Bush wants to select a woman, this is the one he should pick.

Diane Sykes - Seventh Circuit Court ... from Wisconsin ... big plus is age (47) ... considered very conservative, but a bit risky because she doesn't have a long track record. Rating on Squid Scale 7.75 (very iffy rating ... could be anywhere from 7.0 to 9.0)

Alice Batchelder - Sixth Circuit Court ... from Ohio ... biggest minus is age (61). Conservatives like her ... considered both intellectual and personable.  Rating on Squid Scale 8.25.

Samuel Alito - Third Circuit Court ... 55 years old ... reliably conservative and first class intellect ... nicknamed "Scalito", or "little Scalia" ... he would be a definite fulfilment of the Presidents promise to choose justices in the mold of Thomas and Scalia.  Squid Scale 8.75.

Michael Luttig - Fourth Circuit Court ... 51 year old ... brilliant conservative jurist long thought to be on his way to the Supreme Court ... the favorite of many conservatives.  Squid Scale 8.75.

Karen Willams - Often spoken of here.  Squid's predicted nominee. Squid Scale rating 7.75 (based on limited information, could be higher). Some rumors have her dropping a bit because the White House is uncertain how she will be received by pro-life conservatives.

Two interesting trends, if the scuttlebutt is to be believed:

1. The trend has swung in a conservative direction. The White House seems to understand the importance of not betraying conservatives with a moderate or "blank slate" nominee. Some of the names being mentioned a few days ago were pretty scary.
2. White guys are being given a second look.  Recent polling data shows that Americans would look favorably upon a highly qualified nominee regardless of race or gender.

I do not wish to change my prediction of Karen Williams, but if the President showed the courage to nominate Luttig, Alito, or Corrigan. I would rejoice to be wrong ... er, I should say ... less correct than usual.

The Latest ....

It is obvious by now, of course, that the President will not name his Supreme Court nominee until next week.

Tuning my astute ear to the rumor mill over the last few days, I cannot help but think how fortunate my dear readers are (if I may say so humbly) to have me sort through the confusion on their behalf.

By this time one would expect the list of names being "mentioned" to be rapidly shrinking. Instead there has been a flurry of new names added to the old favorites.

Names like Harriet Miers, Maureen Mahoney, and Danny Boggs have surfaced. Alberto Gonzales and Larry Thompson rumors refuse to die.

There has even been a small boomlet for the downtrodden white males. 

J. Michael Luttig and Samuel Alito are favorites of many conservatives, and were the President to choose based simply on merit, their names would quickly rise toward the top.

Priscilla Owen has withdrawn her name from consideration ... leaving only four names on the fabled Squid's Short List:  Emelio Garza, Janice Rogers Brown, Edith Jones, and Karen Williams.

None of these are getting much buzz at the moment, except for Williams, who continues to be included in many short lists... and whom I predicted nine days ago to be the President's pick.

A Thrilling Announcement ....

Soon I hope to post an historic first:  the Squid Viewer's Guide to the Supreme Court Announcement.

Yes, those fortunate enough to be in possession of the Squid Viewer's Guide will be able to perform an instant analysis of the President's pick ...

• Has he chosen a true blue conservative or a squishy moderate ... or something in between?
• Has he satisfied his conservative base and enraged the liberals, or has he fallen into the gruesome trap of being a "uniter not a divider"?

You, with the Squid Viewer's Guide in one hand and the TV remote in the other, will amaze your friends and family with instant and profound analysis of the President's announcement.

Others may stare blankly at the television screen, but not you, my dear reader.

You will be ready with the knowing smile, the meaningful cluck of the tongue, the insightfully furrowed brow of a seasoned political insider.

Your political prowess will be a wonder for all to behold.

"But why is the Viewer's Guide necessary," one might ask, "since you have already told us the choice is going to be Karen Williams?"

My friends, your unworthy correspondent is known not only for his astuteness, but also for his humility.

I must recognize the possibility, remote though it be, that my prediction could fall short of perfect accuracy.

In that unlikely event, I would not wish my readers to be adrift with no guidance ... sheep without a shepherd, as it were.

Thus I propose to organize and categorize the swirling cacophany of names into an at-a-glance reference.

Indeed, the Squid Viewer's Guide is already considered a must-read resource ... even though it has not yet been written.

I should mention another name that is getting some buzz in the Supreme Court sweepstakes:  Judge Raoul Cantero of the Florida Supreme Court.

Cantero is not all that well known ... he meets the Hispanic criterion, and has expressed pro-life views in the past.

Perhaps my faithful readers will be interested in the latest judicial rumors coming from ConfirmThem.com ....

But, late this afternoon I have begun receiving word that we should start focusing on Orangeburg, South Carolina, the home of Judge Karen Williams.

... which means the Supreme Court announcement is getting close.

Most expect the President to name his choice this week ... probably Thursday or Friday.

The names being thrown around include (in addition to Priscilla Owen ... see prior post):

Diane Sykes - A young, conservative judge from Wisconsin, now on the Seventh Circuit Court.

 

Attorney General Alberto Gonzales - Not likely, as this would be a slap in the face to the President's conservative base ... who distrust Gonzales.

 

Miguel Estrada - A conservative Hispanic attorney who was denied a place on the Circuit Court by a Democrat filibuster. Almost made the celebrated Squid's Short List, but the word has been that Estrada was not interested.

Recently, in a moment of weakness, I felt some pangs of regret I had not placed Sykes on the Short List ... she is indeed one to keep an eye on for future openings.

But I remain unmoved by the swirling speculation. Karen Williams was predicted by me a full five days ago as the nominee.

Like last time, the White House is holding this choice very tightly.

The fact that Williams is not being widely discussed at the moment makes my prediction all the more likely to be correct.

The good people over at ConfirmThem.com are reporting that the President will announce his choice this week, and perhaps in the next day or two.

A number of ConfirmThem's sources are saying that the likely pick is Priscilla Owen.

Owen is on the authoritative Squid's Short List, so please refer to my summary below.

I, however, stand by my analysis of whom the President will pick and whom he should pick.

Dear friends, I should have anticipated it.

I noted at the end of my previous post that Karen Williams would not be my choice to replace Justice O'Connor. 

Since then, I have been inundated with urgent pleas to divulge who would be my pick.

I consider it not unlikely that among this flood of emails may be some emanating from the corridors of the White House itself. I have no doubt that certain highly-placed individuals are keenly interested in my thoughts on the matter.

At any rate, I am happy to oblige. 

Were I the President, I would choose none other than Judge Emelio Garza of the Fifth Circuit Court.

Judge Garza not only has a long conservative record, but has openly criticized Roe v. Wade. He would delight the conservative, pro-life base.

He would enrage Democrats and their allies, but they would have to moderate somewhat their hatred against the first Hispanic nominee to the Supreme Court. 

His background and sunny disposition would make him a formidable nominee before the Judiciary Committee.

Yes, if I, Mortimus Squid, were President, the liberals would be forced to put up or shut up.

If they wished to filibuster the first Hispanic nominee to the Supreme Court, I would give them the rope to hang themselves.

The Democrats would like to think ... and like us to think ... that anyone who has expressed pro-life views is out of bounds as a Supreme Court nominee.

Nominating Garza would send clear notice that we do not intend to play by those rules.

Mortimus Squid's Astonishingly Accurate Prediction #2:

The President will pick Karen Williams of the Fourth Circuit Court to replace Sandra Day O'Connor on the Supreme Court.

 

Here's why Williams will be the pick:

1. She is a woman.
2. She is acceptable to most conservatives.
3. She has no known paper trail of opposition to Roe v. Wade. The "you-can't-prove-I'm-pro-life-and-I'm-not-going-to-talk-about-it" approach served John Roberts well, and I have a feeling the President would like to repeat the pattern.
4. She will be difficult to portray as an extremist ... look at the picture ... does she look like an extremist?
5. She is relatively young (54) and can be expected to serve on the court for many years.

It also doesn't hurt that:

1. She is attractive.  I deplore the fact that this even matters, but it does ... as we saw with Roberts. This emphasis on appearance does bode well for my own prospects should I ever enter the political or judicial arena; nonetheless I view it as a degrading trend.
2. She is from South Carolina, home state of Senator Lindsey Graham and a state important to Senator John McCain's chances of winning the Republican nomination in 2008. Graham and McCain are influential mavericks whose vocal support could almost assure Williams' confirmation, even if the Democrats try a filibuster.

Is she a reliable conservative?

It would be fair to say she is a proven judicial conservative ... perhaps as conservative as her court mate, Michael Luttig, who is an icon to some conservatives.

But Williams is not ... sigh ... on record in opposition to Roe v. Wade, and like Roberts, she probably will refuse to address the subject during the hearings.

 

So there are question marks, and some pro-lifers will be unhappy that the President didn't pick a more openly anti-Roe nominee.

Summary

Williams would not be my choice, but she will be the President's ... and he could certainly do worse.

Dear and valued readers,

In my next post, which is forthcoming within 24 hours, I shall announce whom the President will name to replace Justice Sandra Day O'Connor on the Supreme Court.

This eagerly anticipated announcement on my part is second in importance only to the President's own announcement of his nominee.

In fact, since the two announcements will name the same person, and since mine occurs first, one could make a case that the Squid announcement is more significant than the President's.

But to claim so would be unseemly and not in keeping with my accustomed humility ... so I demur.

Meanwhile, feel free to browse at your leisure the authoritative Short List I compiled in an earlier post.