What is Bush doing? I understand that by nominating someone without a paper trail s/he would have an easier time getting through the nomination process however, this could be bad news. Is Bush doing the right thing? Granted, she’s worked for him forever but does he know her? Does he really know her objectives? Many critics are saying that the conservative groups won’t be happy with Bush’s pick and supposedly, this ‘pick’ was pre-approved by some democrats. Remember Reagan and O’Connor - it happened then and could happen now.
I have no problem with her not being a judge; Rehnquist wasn’t even a judge before being nominated. She seems to have a great amount of experience from being the president of her law firm to being the president of the Dallas Bar Association. These two positions alone justify her experience and makes her a quite credible, Supreme Court nominee. My concern is her persuasion. She has no court decisions to reflect on and we don’t know her political views either. Granted, that is supposed to be irrelevant but we don’t want another O’Connor. That’s the whole benefit of being president: when a judge needs to be nominated, that president gets to choose the predecessor.
Let’s just say I have a bad feeling about Miss Harriet Miers. Something smells. People aren’t going to be happy. Heads are going to roll. Maybe Bush has decided to ‘roll over’ considering his low ratings. Is Harriet Miers the best person for the job, or is it because of the necessary quota? Is there a hint of Affirmative Action here? If Bush drops the ball here, he’s going to hear about it. We’re supposed to trust the man we voted for, but recently, I’ve questioned some of his decisions. Even Roberts is purportedly questionable. I do trust Bush, I do trust our party, but now is not the time to make mistakes. We’ll find out soon enough.