Wow. I never would have predicted this when Miers was first nominated.

So the question is, is this a triumph for conservatives with--strangely enough--the assistance of Democrats? Or was this, as some suspected early on, a ploy by Bush to offer Miers as a sacrificial lamb?

I seriously doubt it's a ploy. Consider how similar the events that led to Miers' nominations were to the events that led to the Cheney pick for VP. Miers was part of the vetting process for judicial nominations like Cheney was supposedly in charge of vetting VP candidates. As Bush became more familiar with either, he decided that his vetter would be the ideal choice. It worked in the case of Cheney--meaning that the public generally accepted the choice--but not in the case of Miers.

I think the administration got lucky that Miers never made it to hearings.

Eric wrote:

So the question is, is this a triumph for conservatives with--strangely enough--the assistance of Democrats? Or was this, as some suspected early on, a ploy by Bush to offer Miers as a sacrificial lamb?

I can't imagine why anyone would believe that it was a ploy. If it was, it was the dumbest such scheme one could possibly come up with because it only damaged him. The problem with this notion is that he didn't need to do it. There were, and are, solid conservatives who are quite confirmable. Michael McConnell was passed for an appeals court seat on a voice vote without a single objection. He had 300 legal scholars, including almost all of the prominent liberals in the academy, sign a letter supporting his nomination to that court. There's no way the Democrats could have mounted enough opposition to even make him sweat the process. They could have gotten 30 votes, tops, to oppose his nomination in the Senate. If they're smart, they'll nominate him now.

Charles Krauthammer deserves an award.