Quote:
Originally posted by soup sandwich
I'm sure Bush II does not think of his "trust me" as a fall back position. He no doubt thinks his "trust me" is as good, if not better, than 15 years worth of scrutinized legal opinions. To Bush II, the word of a trustworthy person carries more weight than accordian file full of data. This is why we like him. It is a reson why the voters chose him. He has strength of conviction.
|
Understood, and I agree, to a point. But this pick is too important. I'll generally acede to Bush's judgments - but he's had a few notable whiffs. Putin's heart is actually kind of black. Even when Bush whiffs, he gets a lot of credit, including from me, because I think he's going from good intentions. But, there was just no good reason for this move - there are lots of people out there who would be excellent for this.
Quote:
|
And I would like to distinguish Souter from Miers. Bush II knows Miers a whole lot better than BushI knew Souter. Indeed, Souter was Sununununu's pick, while Miers is clearly Bush II's pick. BushI erred in trusting Sununu, who had misinterpretted Souter. Here, Bush II has first hand knowledge of Miers.
|
I know. Miers might well turn out to be the perfect choice. But, given that this is a lifetime appointment, given that it's been the Court that has most dramatically scaped the American scene for some years, and given that there's no real reason to think that Bush will get another slot to fill, "might" is just scaring the bejeebers out of some of us. A McConnoll (sp?) would have been perfect, too, without the "might."
Maybe we're just too insecure.
