There has been quite a bit of talk this week among conservatives concerning President Bush's Supreme Court nominee, Harriet Miers. A number of "leading figures" have condemned the choice, others called for her to withdraw for the good of her president. The former is reactionary, the latter absurd.
These talking heads have created a tizzy while admitting they have no basis for their condemnation. Listen to a conservative talk radio show and you will hear half the callers crying foul and half calling for patience. The problem, as stated by many, is the lack of a paper trail. Conservatives fear getting an unknown who will shift left after conformation. Welcome to the craps shoot that is lifetime appointment (personally, I'd say a thirty-year term is more than sufficient).
My assessment is fairly simple. To expect a person to remain static over the course of their life is unreasonable. Those fearing another Souter have forgotten their history (mainly that Bush 41 did not know him personally). Miers and Bush 43 have been well acquainted for over twenty years. While I do not expect him to know every infinitesimal detail concerning Miers, Bush 43 does have a firm understanding regarding her character and devotion to the law. Isn't that the most you should/could expect when picking a judge?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
1 comment:
You don't expect reasonable discourse in this day and age of "instant gratification news blogging" do you?
There are no ratings in reasonable discussion. Shouting, name-calling, verbal baiting, and figurative fist pounding are what sells.
So screw you and your reasonable nature!
Post a Comment