Some interesting thought on the Miers nomination
This is on one of the blogs I read regularly (well, as regularly as he posts)
It is an interesting view from a Libertarian.
Miers Post
My personal thoughts on the nomination are pretty neutral. I see no overwhelming reason why she should or shouldn't be confirmed. I confess it does have a tinge of "cronyism" but every President indulges himself in that nasty little habit. "To the winner goes the spoils" as they say. But then, it seems her name was on Harry Reid's list of acceptable people.
I am amused by the fact that both the left and the right seem equally nonplussed by her nomination.
Threescore and ten may have a point here...... Supreme Court
It is an interesting view from a Libertarian.
Miers Post
My personal thoughts on the nomination are pretty neutral. I see no overwhelming reason why she should or shouldn't be confirmed. I confess it does have a tinge of "cronyism" but every President indulges himself in that nasty little habit. "To the winner goes the spoils" as they say. But then, it seems her name was on Harry Reid's list of acceptable people.
I am amused by the fact that both the left and the right seem equally nonplussed by her nomination.
Threescore and ten may have a point here...... Supreme Court
posted by exMI | 10:13
1 Comments:
I confess it does have a tinge of "cronyism" but every President indulges himself in that nasty little habit.
That's an understatement. It's complete cronyism. There are so many capable candidates. If she's the best Bush can find, he's not looking very hard.
If I were running the show, I'd nominate Janice Brown from California. From what I know about her, she's awesome. She also has experience and a judicial history, unlike Miers.
We really have nothing to judge Miers with. Bush pretty much says "trust me." sorry, Mr. Pres. Trust me is not enough.
Post a Comment
<< Home