The emptiest suit since Dan Quayle. The female version of a cigar-chompin’ crony. An inspiration to unqualified people.

Now that we have this image of Harriet Miers, can we please stop the insanity and examine the facts about the president’s Supreme Court nominee? Given her caricature, you’d think she barely has the talent to get out of bed.

That’s not true, but don’t take my word. Stack her resume up against those of the justices whose departures have created openings for President Bush. Yes, William Rehnquist and Sandra Day O’Connor, who were relatively unknown until they became definitive justices. Look at their backgrounds:

William Rehnquist:

By 1952, the Milwaukee native had graduated from Stanford with bachelor’s, master’s and law degrees and from Harvard with another master’s. He then clerked a year for a Supreme Court justice.

Strong start, no question. He next practiced law in Phoenix for 16 years. While he occasionally wrote for law journals, his biography shows that he “engaged in a general practice of law with primary emphasis on civil litigation.”

In 1969, his public career started, joining the Nixon administration as assistant attorney general in the office of legal counsel. A good job, but not the highest rung.

In fact, President Nixon didn’t even know Rehnquist until three months before he nominated him to the Supreme Court. That apparent lack of stature didn’t bother the Senate, which confirmed him without huge rancor.

Sandra Day O’Connor:

The El Paso, Texas, native likewise graduated from Stanford and its law school. But in 1950s America, she was like every other woman who couldn’t land a job with a big firm. From 1952 to 1965, she held various posts as a government attorney or civilian lawyer while raising children.

Next came four years as an Arizona assistant attorney general. In 1969, she was appointed to the Arizona Senate and legislated for the next five years, including a stint as the chamber’s majority leader.

Good political leadership during that stretch. Solid state and local activity.

Her judicial career took stride in 1974 when she won a state judgeship. She stayed put, until Democratic Gov. Bruce Babbitt appointed her to the Arizona Court of Appeals in 1979. Ronald Reagan called in 1981, and another unknown went to the Supreme Court — winning confirmation, 99-0.

Harriet Miers:

Let’s now look at the “empty suit.” After graduating from Southern Methodist University in 1970 with math and law degrees, Harriet Miers hit her own glass ceiling. Women still didn’t get big-firm jobs in Texas.

Federal clerkships weren’t much easier, but she nabbed one. It didn’t match Rehnquist’s Supreme Court clerking, but women didn’t naturally get those jobs, either.

Two years later — bingo. She cracked into a prestigious Dallas firm in 1972, and, like Rehnquist, she practiced law for the next 16 years. Her only interruption was in 1985, when she became the first woman to lead the Dallas Bar.

The rising professional added to her resume in 1988 by serving two years on the Dallas City Council. Her public involvement continued in the 1990s when she served from 1992 to 1993 as State Bar of Texas president and then five years as Texas Lottery Commission chairwoman. Oh, and she became managing partner of her firm, giving her three decades in the law.

Add all that up, and Harriet Miers spent more time lawyering than Rehnquist or O’Connor. Miers also has about 10 years of state and local leadership, which beats Rehnquist and matches O’Connor in civic activity. O’Connor trumps her (and Rehnquist) in early court experience, but Miers beats them both in high-level federal involvement.

Since 2001, Miers has had input on everything President Bush has done. You may not like his decisions, but it’s hard to argue that she hasn’t been knee-deep in them as staff secretary, deputy chief of staff and legal counsel. Rehnquist and O’Connor can’t approach that level of experience before their nominations.

Here’s the sum: Their academic resumes trump hers, but Miers’ matches and even surpasses their professional and civic involvement. And she far outscores them on the workings of government at the highest level.

You judge whether she belongs on the court, but let’s not deride this lady anymore. Not unless we’re willing to trash William Rehnquist and Sandra Day O’Connor along with her.