Bush’s SCOTUS Choice
William Kristol:
Update:
I think Roberts will be confirmed, too, if only because Stevens, Breyer, Ginsburg, Souter and Kennedy will still outweigh the Rehenquist, Scalia, Thomas and Roberts "originalist" contingent. The Democrats will probably save their political capital as Roberts' appointment really doesn't change anything. Besides, Roberts got some fairly wide bi-partisan support the last time he was appointed.
Anyway, the Dems should save their political capital, but you never can tell with these people.
I had expected Bush to choose a woman. Indeed, I pointed in last week's editorial to several competent and qualified conservative women. But in preemptively yielding to gender quotas, so to speak, I made a mistake--and earned a well-deserved and well-argued rebuke from Charmaine Yoest at National Review Online, who said I (and others) had "conceded too easily" to the pernicious claims of identity politics. She was right. And the president, weighing a truly important decision for the country's future, agreed with her. By simply going for the best person, by not worrying about walking out to the podium last night accompanied by a white male, Bush did something important and courageous. He showed that he knows that on really significant matters, one has to ignore political correctness and political pandering, and even political convenience. For this lesson, as well as for an intellectually impressive and politically sound choice, Bush deserves a lot of credit.
Update:
I think Roberts will be confirmed, too, if only because Stevens, Breyer, Ginsburg, Souter and Kennedy will still outweigh the Rehenquist, Scalia, Thomas and Roberts "originalist" contingent. The Democrats will probably save their political capital as Roberts' appointment really doesn't change anything. Besides, Roberts got some fairly wide bi-partisan support the last time he was appointed.
Anyway, the Dems should save their political capital, but you never can tell with these people.












