Both President Bush and Senator Chuck Schumer were quoted discussing potential nominees to the Supreme Court over the last 24 hours, Bush in the context of a press conference and Schumer on his cell-phone. Adhering to the age-old rule of "sanity first," let's see what Bush had to say, behind door number one.
In a nutshell, Bush noted that he is still pondering the potential candidates, but added that he will not choose a nominee based on the litmus tests of gay marriage and abortion.
''I'll pick people who, one, can do the job, and people who are honest, people who are bright and people who will strictly interpret the Constitution and not use the bench to legislate from,'' Bush said.
Behind door number two, we have Schumer. Schumer could care less who the nominee is apparently.
Schumer promised a fight over whoever the President’s nominee was: “It's not about an individual judge… It's about how it affects the overall makeup of the court.”
In fact, it's not about whether there will be a war, but rather how the inevitable war will be fought. So much for any thought that the filibuster compromise would be respected. In fact, Schumer believes the deal is irrelevent to the Supreme Court, as any nominee put forth by the Bush administration for the high court would be "extreme," not by virtue of their beliefs, but rather by virtue of the appointment.
“A Priscilla Owen or Janice Rogers Brown style appointment may not have been extraordinary to the appellate court but may be extraordinary to the Supreme Court.”
The lesson?
As usual, the left will change any rule, any time it suits them. In this case, Schumer, who sits on the judiciary committee, is ready to flush the compromise before a nominee has even been named, before any debate has occured, and before any vote has been sought.
All the more reason, in my opinion, to nominate either Owen, Brown, or Pryor. It would be precious indeed to watch Democratic senators explain how a nominee is suited to the federal bench, but is too extreme for the federal bench. Of course, that desire is based almost solely on the entertainment value...for the record.
Personally, I'm glad the Democrats are planning to go Kozinski on any potential nominee. Let them break the deal. It would only take a small handful of those Republicans who entered the deal to once again push for the nuclear option, votes that will be much easier to assure when Frist can say, "See? They never had any intention of honoring their word in the first place."
Perhaps this time the Republicans won't get suckered into a deal that was designed solely to stall for time, thus allowing the filibuster to be used for the Supreme Court. Looking back, it almost seems silly now.
How exactly did we "save the Republic?"
What disaster was averted?
How again did we preserve checks and balances?
Also posting: Powerpundit
No comments:
Post a Comment