Monday, October 03, 2005
Supreme Court: Harriet Miers????
I don't know anything about Harriet Miers except what I have heard on the news shows and read on the internet. My immediate gut reaction to her nomination to the Supreme Court: looks like Bush is doing something nice for an old friend.
As David Bernstein notes (via Michelle Malkin), this appointment isn't going to do much to quiet cries of cronyism.
I agree with the vast majority of comments that I've read so far, that Bush could have done a lot better.
UPDATE: It occurs to me that one explanation for appointing Miers might be that all the candidates whose names have been bandied about by the pundits, e.g., Luttig, McConnell, Brown, asked not to be nominated, because they didn't want to be subjected to the kind of dirty politics that the Dems would surely have practiced in opposition to a known conservative. If this is the case, then the Dems won a big one by forfeit.
UPDATE 2: Beldar, a practicing trial lawyer in Houston, isn't upset at all, and thinks Bush made a good choice.
As David Bernstein notes (via Michelle Malkin), this appointment isn't going to do much to quiet cries of cronyism.
I agree with the vast majority of comments that I've read so far, that Bush could have done a lot better.
UPDATE: It occurs to me that one explanation for appointing Miers might be that all the candidates whose names have been bandied about by the pundits, e.g., Luttig, McConnell, Brown, asked not to be nominated, because they didn't want to be subjected to the kind of dirty politics that the Dems would surely have practiced in opposition to a known conservative. If this is the case, then the Dems won a big one by forfeit.
UPDATE 2: Beldar, a practicing trial lawyer in Houston, isn't upset at all, and thinks Bush made a good choice.
Comments:
Post a Comment
