It is probably time for President Bush to spare the country any more embarrassment and withdraw his nomination of White House counsel Harriet E. Miers to the Supreme Court.

Conservatives, who have been vocal, are divided over her; liberals, who have been less forthcoming, have their own reservations. The center, where most Americans who have political opinions tend to lurk, probably thinks Ms. Miers is simply not qualified -- or is by no means the most qualified person -- for the court.

The vehement opposition of some conservatives and the religious right to the nomination is curious. Given Ms. Miers' membership in an evangelical Christian church that is described as "very pro-life" on abortion, one might imagine that political faction to be delighted with Mr. Bush's choice.

Instead, many have come out against her. One exception is Focus on the Family founder James Dobson, who said after conversations with White House adviser Karl Rove that he believes Ms. Miers opposes abortion and would be a good justice.

The right's opposition to Ms. Miers' nomination has prompted some suspicion that they are running a game on the rest of America: They oppose her, conning the center and left into dropping their guard, thinking that Ms. Miers would be better than a more certifiable opponent to centrist views.

Liberals are upset about Harriet Miers not only because of her unstated position on abortion rights, but also because they can't abide someone who is so enchanted with Mr. Bush. Her mash notes to him and to Laura Bush -- the nominee called the president the most brilliant man she had ever met -- suggest the potential justice may have difficulty steering an independent course away from the man she has served since their days in Texas.

Many in the political center just think Ms. Miers is not the most qualified person -- or the most qualified woman -- for the post. Although the Constitution does not require prior judicial experience for the Supreme Court, 70 percent of the justices have come from the bench. The justice that Ms. Miers is nominated to succeed, Sandra Day O'Connor, served in Arizona on county superior court and the state court of appeals before nomination by President Reagan. Does anyone believe, as Mr. Bush insists, that Harriet Miers is better qualified to be a justice than all judges, legal scholars and career lawyers, male or female, in the United States?

The argument that her qualifications will emerge in Senate Judiciary Committee hearings is fatuous. The Senate's time should not be wasted when the nation faces severe problems like the Iraq war and the post-Katrina recovery. Committee Chairman Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania put it very well when he suggested after meeting Ms. Miers that she needs a crash course in U.S. constitutional law.

Mr. Bush obviously cares a lot about Ms. Miers or he wouldn't have tried to reward her for a career of loyal service to him by naming her to the court. He should now carry that solicitousness for her to the next level by withdrawing the nomination before the charade becomes worse. Or, Ms. Miers could again prove her loyalty to Mr. Bush and take herself out of the running.

Whatever happens, President Bush has put forth a weak choice in Harriet Miers. He should go back to the drawing board and get the nation someone who is truly qualified.