Is Miers Smart Enough?

In my last post I made the claim that prudence is more important than sapience, and I believe it is for politics. However there are cases where sapience is more valuable than prudence. If your bag is mathematics and you're as smart as Einstein, people won't care if you have wild hair or even if you can't tie your own shoes. If you're a thrill-seeking day-trader who races sports cars as a hobby, chances are you're short on prudence but if you're smart enough to pull in the bucks, no one will bother you. For most of us though, we're better off being wise than smart. Which brings us to a difficult juncture: it is easy to determine someone's sapience. We have all manner of means and measurements. However it is difficult to measure someone's prudence. Perhaps that excuses the Democrats somewhat for their presidential candidates, perhaps not. Let's just say that prudence is hard to judge.

I'd like to tie this into the recent Supreme Court Nomination of Harriet Miers. Being a justice there strikes me as a reasonably elite position. These are the people whom we task with judging laws. Obviously prudence is essential. Furthermore, the justices are supposed to discuss the law and each cast a single vote. Effectively, that makes them equals. Now ideally the way the system is supposed to work, folks will prepare briefs and argue their case before the supreme court. The justices will ask questions and come to the best decision they can. The judges are supposed to make decisions based on the content and context of the law, not on their personal beliefs. That immediately makes it different than politics. In its most basic form, it should be a clinical evaluation of the law. It is an exercise in thought, ie sapience.

Regarding Ms. Miers, her background has not demonstrated any superlative skills. There is a lot of debate among the conservative base whether she is sufficiently socially conservative. Democrats seem to be warming up to her in the way that an unknown is not yet an enemy. However I'm going to go out on a limb here and say I would not vote for her unless she was able to demonstrate a solid mental fitness for the job. My views are (mostly) socially liberal and governmentally conservative - which means I'm not likely to see a justice I like from this administration. But, I firmly believe this: no one wins with stupid. And I'm not saying Miers isnt a great legal mind, because I dont know, but if she is, she should be forced to demonstrate it. Unlike other candidates, she does not have a background that guarantees competence. In fact, the little data we have leans the other way. How many supreme court caliber intellectuals do you know who would call GWB the smartest man theyve ever known?

Conservatives, this one's on you. Take a deep look at your president as he asks you to trust him again and look around. Look at the state of the GOP. Look at the budget, the Iraq war, Katrina, the increased lobbying, the competence of homeland security, the resistance to torture legislation, the medicare entitlements, our debt to China, the tangible lack of congressional oversight. Watch as everything conservatives have fought for gets flushed down the drain, and ask yourself do you trust that this president will pick a solid conservative? Do you trust that this president will pick a capable person? Remember...no one wins with stupid.