You can prove anything with statistics

I hear lots of hand-wringing over how ill-qualified Miers is for the Supreme court. (But then again, I recall people making the same claims about Clarence Thomas when he was first nominated. Bill Handel, on his talk show, made much of Thomas receiving only a "qualified" rating from the ABA.)

Let's assume she's as ill-qualified as her detractors claim. Why would Bush pick someone so under-qualified for the Supreme Court? Maybe he's in a hurry.

According to a study of judicial nominations I recently completed, the less distinguished the nominee--the less intellectually accomplished, the less prolific, the less impressive the record--the more likely it is that he or she will be confirmed. It also helps to be old, white and female.