I have to give the president credit. He does stick by his guns. But this time, I believe he shot himself in the foot.

The nomination of Harriet Miers to be seated for life in the highest court in the land not only smacks of political cronyism, it’s a disgraceful insult to the more than 800 federal judges throughout America. It is hard to believe that the president painstakingly reviewed the records and qualifications of more than 100 candidates before coming up with the sterling pick of his personal lawyer.

Whether one agrees with Justice John Robert’s views or not, no one could question his credentials as a scholar, having been a judge and previously arguing before the Supreme Court on 39 cases. That’s not the case with Ms. Miers. Nothing close.

One would think, in the wake of the Hurricane Katrina fiasco — and the backlash from FEMA Director Mike Brown’s ineptitude — that the president would be far more prudent in making appointments to positions of such critical importance. But, as usual, loyalty, politics and personal friendship seem to come first before what’s best for America.

Mike Brown had no substantive qualifications to head up the most vital emergency organization in the nation, and everyone knew that. But he did campaign vigorously for Mr. Bush in both elections, as did his staff that worked directly under his wing. That, it seems, was the criteria that weighed heavier than ability to do the job. Much the same with a number of other appointees, which were chronicled in a recent article by syndicated columnist Molly Ivins.

Of course, most presidents and other top officials, have exercised their own brands of cronyism. They naturally want to be surrounded by loyalists. But rarely have presidents selected people to such highly important positions who were simply unqualified altogether. Harriet Miers is unqualified. Her nomination is utterly contemptuous toward the courts, the government and the American people.

Supreme Court justices are supposed to comprise the Mount Olympus of intellect from the vast reservoir of legal scholars throughout America. There are hundreds out there, but she’s not one of them. Ms. Miers worked as a litigating lawyer for more than twenty years, rising to the top of her law firm. That might make her a good civil lawyer, a good manager, perhaps a good leader and a good businesswoman. But it doesn’t make her a legal scholar. As head of the Texas State Bar Association, then Governor G.W. Bush appointed her to the Texas State Lottery Commission, which apparently blossomed into a strong personal alliance. That eventually, led her to the White House and Mr. Bush’s closest legal advisor. Most importantly, Ms. Miers is also a devout born-again Christian with fundamentalist values, her loftiest credentials to be sure.

Where is there any evidence that she deserves Mount Olympus? Where is there any evidence of her decision-making ability? Or, her superior intellect? What substantive experience has earned her the way to that lofty pinnacle? Not only has she no judicial background, there is no record of her positions on any issue of vital importance, which is fundamental for anyone who will wear the robes of a U.S. Supreme Court Justice. The American people deserve nothing less, and I would hope the U.S. Senate — on both sides of the aisle — will bear that in mind.

Don’t hold your breath. This one will be divided, as usual, along partisan boundaries just like everything else that comes before congress. As always, the Bush loyalists will march blindly in lockstep to the party line, regardless of what’s right or wrong for America.

I can just hear it. Alone and private inside the same White House hallways where Mr. Clinton had his tryst with Monica. “Stick with me Harriet. You’re loyalty will pay off. When the time is right, I’ll make you a Supreme Court Justice. We’ll have to go through the motions, pretending to labor through a list of candidates and all that, but it’s all for show. You’re my gal. I need your help to fulfill my legacy. I know that you’ll stick to your guns about abortion, gay rights, religion in public places and death with dignity issues. After all, we want judges to interpret law, not make law. Right?”

The rhetoric about “interpreting” law versus “making” law is political hogwash. Any ruling that comes from the Supreme Court makes law. If Roe versus Wade is overturned, it will make law forbidding abortions. If the court rules that state sponsored prayer in public schools is legal, that will create law. If the court rules that gays are not entitled to the same rights as straight people, that will make law. So who is kidding who, Mr. President?

I suppose we should all be consoled by his words, “Trust me.”

We have. For five years. We’re still counting the body bags.

(Marshall Frank is a retired Metro Dade homicide detective and the author of several novels. He can be reached a mlf238@aol.com.)