As the New York Times states in the following article, Harriet Miers was done in by the right wing of the GOP. And they are very proud of it. She just was not conservative enough for them. For those who want to keep Roe vrs Wade and a woman's right to decide what to do with her own body Miers might have been the best you could get from this administration. Now the President will have to come up with someone who for sure will at least look like a Justice that would vote to overturn the court's decision to keep abortion legal.

This should be a wake up call to those folks who support a woman's right to decide what she will do for her own health. Some just assumed that President Bush would really be a compassionate conservative and not mess with the Supreme Court. But his record is clear on this subject and now the conservative movement will hold him to his word that his next nominee will be a true conservative who would vote to make abortion illegal. That just might be Senator John Cornyn from Texas.

Here is the Time's story:

"WASHINGTON, Oct. 27 - By Monday, even the staunchest allies of the Bush administration could no longer deny that the nomination of Harriet E. Miers to the Supreme Court was in deep, deep trouble.

The conservative rebellion had not subsided. Her individual courtesy calls to senators had failed to quiet the doubts about her constitutional expertise. Her performance in rehearsals for her confirmation hearings worried some White House officials. And Republican senators were agitating for documents from her work in the White House.

On Tuesday, Senator Jeff Sessions, the Alabama Republican who is a conservative stalwart on the Senate Judiciary Committee, vented his concerns in a conversation with former Senator Daniel R. Coats of Indiana, who was escorting Ms. Miers through her meetings with senators.

"I was uneasy about it, and I just explained my unease," Mr. Sessions said. "I shared with Dan my observations, the good and the bad. I think the American people at this point in time would desire a person who is steeped in constitutional jurisprudence, particularly the people who supported President Bush."

With support slipping on Capitol Hill and the White House preoccupied with an array of problems like Iraq and the C.I.A. leak case, the endgame had begun.

Administration officials said it became clear as more and more Republicans demanded White House documents involving Ms. Miers and more and more sympathetic senators expressed the fear that the nomination had suffered too many setbacks. Officials said they were increasingly worried about the drip of reports about Ms. Miers's past, including her speeches, writings and work as commissioner of the Texas Lottery, which could have made her nomination hearings insurmountably tough.

It was, a Republican official said, "death by a thousand cuts."

"It was senators who are friends calling and saying she has no gravitas," said the official, who insisted on anonymity because the White House requested no public discussion of internal deliberations. "If she had gotten as far as the hearings, she could have been confirmed."

Senator John Cornyn, the Texas Republican who is a friend of Ms. Miers, said, "In the end, it was clear that this has turned into a very tough, very nasty process, and you have got to really want it to be able to submit yourself to all of this."

White House officials would not say whether Mr. Bush and Ms. Miers had spoken about the downward track the nomination was taking as events unfolded this week. They emphasized that the decision was entirely Ms. Miers's and that Mr. Bush had been disappointed by the process.

The exit strategy, in the end, revolved around the documents. On Monday, Mr. Bush drew a "red line" over the documents demanded by the Judiciary Committee.

"People can learn about Harriet Miers through hearings, but we are not going to destroy this business about people being able to walk into the Oval Office and say, 'Mr. President, here's my advice to you,' " Mr. Bush told reporters after a meeting in the cabinet room.

With that, Mr. Bush signaled that an impasse had been reached, one that would ultimately allow Ms. Miers to withdraw gracefully. The events that followed tracked almost perfectly with advice given a few days earlier by Charles Krauthammer, the conservative syndicated columnist. "A way out: irreconcilable differences over documents," Mr. Krauthammer wrote in a column.

Ms. Miers informed Mr. Bush of her withdrawal in a telephone call to the White House residence around 8:30 on Wednesday evening.

Senator Bill Frist, Republican of Tennessee, the Senate majority leader, spoke to Andrew H. Card Jr., the White House chief of staff, around that time, offering what an aide to Mr. Frist described as a "frank assessment" of her confirmation process. Officials said that by the time Mr. Frist weighed in Ms. Miers had spoken to the president.

Looking back, Senator Sam Brownback, Republican of Kansas and another conservative on the Judiciary Committee, said he could understand the rationale behind the nomination.

"I can see the president deciding to make this choice, saying: 'This is a conservative, I am going to be able get this one through without a big fight. It has got some support from Harry Reid. So I might get some Democratic votes. My base will hold with me, because they will know I will pick somebody conservative.' I mean, I can see the calculus."

In the end, Mr. Brownback said, social conservatives were simply not inclined to go on faith that Ms. Miers was a reliable conservative.

"They had been burnt on so many ones before," he said. "They wanted to really know."

There were, in fact, warnings from the start. After years of waiting, hoping and political organizing, all in pursuit of a fundamentally different Supreme Court, conservatives were not in the mood for anything less than what Mr. Bush had promised: a justice in the mold of Antonin Scalia or Clarence Thomas.

When reports circulated late last month that Ms. Miers was a leading contender, Gary L. Bauer and other prominent social conservatives told their contacts at the White House that her record was too unknown, that the nomination "would be troubling and very hard to sell," Mr. Bauer recalled.

The White House was known for its exquisite antennas among conservatives, but these were difficult days - Hurricane Katrina, Iraq, scandal on Capitol Hill and the investigation of leaks about of a Central Intelligence Agency operative - that embroiled and distracted Karl Rove, the White House deputy chief of staff.

A Republican sympathetic to Mr. Rove argued that the difficulties in Ms. Miers's nomination stemmed in part from the process, which was overseen by Mr. Card. While Mr. Rove was well aware that Ms. Miers was among those under consideration, he said, the vetting process and the final deliberations were so tightly held that Mr. Rove, the White House's main ambassador to social and religious conservatives, did not know that she was the choice until a few days before the announcement.

That timetable left him little time to canvass opinion among conservative groups and assuage their doubts and left the White House off balance in the battle's early stages.

From Day 1, it was an uphill fight.

"The White House sort of pleaded with me, 'Please don't take a position until the hearings,' " said Paul M. Weyrich, a veteran conservative organizer and founder of the Free Congress Foundation.

But the conservative rebellion against the nomination did not diminish. It grew, fed by the "blogocracy," by a powerful set of conservative columnists, by a movement that felt it had "swallowed" enough compromises on Mr. Bush's agenda, as David Keene, head of the American Conservative Union, put it.

"In a sense, this was his, 'Read my lips,' " Mr. Keene said, alluding to the first President Bush's promise that he would never raise taxes, which he broke to the enduring anger of conservatives.

When it came to the Supreme Court, Mr. Keene added: "His people said, 'This is all important, and you can trust him on this.' So when they woke up one morning and saw all this, they said, 'What's going on here?' "

The problems were only compounded on Capitol Hill. Because Ms. Miers lacked a judicial record, her courtesy calls with individual senators were all the more important.

But unlike Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., who made similar rounds in the summer, she did not overwhelm the senators with her constitutional mastery. Her most damaging misstep may have occurred on Oct. 17, when she met for a second time with Senator Arlen Specter, the Pennsylvania Republican who is chairman of the Judiciary Committee.

Mr. Specter, a former prosecutor who prides himself on his legal expertise, came away from the meeting with the understanding that Ms. Miers recognized a right to privacy in the Constitution, a crucial underpinning of Roe v. Wade, the 1973 decision that established abortion rights.

After news agencies reported Mr. Specter's comments, Ms. Miers called him to contradict his account. His office released a statement an hour later saying he accepted her version, without admitting that he had gotten anything wrong. To Ms. Miers's critics, that was another example of her inexperience on constitutional law.

Her responses to a Senate questionnaire - sent back as inadequate - further undermined support, as did the disclosure this week of speeches she gave in 1993 in which she talked about the importance of "self-determination" on issues like abortion and school prayer.

As the days passed, she found herself in an agonizing crossfire between left and right, between those who challenged her qualifications and those who challenged her conservatism - and some who challenged both.

Her friends said the unforgiving process had to take a personal toll.

"She never let on," said Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison, Republican of Texas. "She was very strong."

But when it was over and Ms. Miers called her on Thursday morning, Ms. Hutchison said: "She sounded like she had just come back from a football game. She was happy. She was ready to go. She was going to start working on getting another nominee."