But President Bush has put himself in the awkward position of asking his base to trust him at precisely the moment the base was expecting Bush to demonstrate their trust was well-founded in the first place.
The press will spend a lot of time wondering what the Democrats will do. But for now the more interesting question is, what will the Republicans do?
Miers may not be the intellectual giant the elites on both sides seem to want, but she managed a large law firm (an elected position, and no small feat), headed up the Texas ABA (elected, no small feat), and rose to White House Counsel (no small feat), so she is no slouch. It may be a pick from weakness, as they say, but one that achieves the dual objectives of shifting the judicial philosophy of the court without a bitter political fight, and I see the practical wisdom in that. Again I hand it to Bush for not doing what everyone says he must, should, and will do. Rove really is the master of conceiving and implementing simple, focused, top-level strategies with a minimum of systemic friction. That is really hard to do and he does it well. Remember, the top-level strategy is to shift the court from activist to originalist. Change the machinery and a change in output naturally follows. This nomination helps secure the important change in philosophy while avoiding the bitter fight over particular outcomes. The more I think about it, the more I think this was a really smart choice. Bush picked a reliable ally whom his opponents are on record supporting. Bush the dunce outsmarts the geniuses once again.
UPDATE from The American Thinker:
The right is starting to sound like the left - shrill and reactionary. Take
a tip from the master, George Bush - ignore them, it really tees them off. The
right is also being coopted by the left, as is revealed in the Miers situation,
into valuing words more than deeds - that's the root of their shallowness.
No comments:
Post a Comment