TMatt takes an exhaustive look at the Miers-Religion stories today in the MSM, but doesn't touch the latest blogRumor...articulated by John Podhoretz at The Corner:
A friend, one of the wisest analysts of politics I know, asks the following fascinating questions: Did the president pick Harriet Miers because she is an evangelical Christian? Is this the real meaning of the "trust me" message -- and are her religious beliefs the reason that James Dobson, Chuck Colson, Marvin Olasky and others have given her the big thumbs-up? They were clearly given an early preview of the Miers nomination and were told things about her or told things by her that made her right with them. Has the president decided, in effect, that just as there has been a Jewish seat and an African-American seat and a female seat on the court, there will now be a born-again seat? And that, therefore, the Miers selection is indeed a reward for the people who turned out in such force for him last November -- but he can't quite say it aloud and hopes people will figure it out over time?
If so, this wasn't cronyism, but rather a new form of conservative tokenism. And as was the case with the tokenism of the past, the sort of policy that earns heated support from those who are being represented by the token pick. I don't like tokenism in any form, the pre-affirmative action kind or the new "diversity" model, but this explanation offers a pretty convincing explanation of the Miers selection.
And a blogger associated with evangelical World Magazine asks:
Now is it just coincidence that the vast majority of people who vocally support 'evangelical' Harriet Miers are themselves 'evangelicals'? You have James Dobson of Focus on the Family. There is Chuck Colson, founder of Prison Fellowship. Jay Sekulow (who converted to Christianity while at a Baptist College) of American Center for Law and Justice. Throw in a few Mormons and Democrat activists, sure, but isn't it weird?