Bush has not earned the right to say, "trust me."
1) He didn't keep his word on embryonic stem cells and created a market in embryos, which is what the culture of death wants.
2) Bush signed McCain/Feingold. His conservative princpled stand rested on hoping the Supreme Court would do what he was afraid to do - kill it.
3) Bush has yet to oppose a dime in socialism.
4) Bush is proud of recruiting Kennedy to write his education bill.
5) Bush created a whole new entitlement - prescription drugs. It wasn't something he was pressured into, either. It's passed and signed but no one wants it.
Some argue that it is the president's choice to pick whomever he will nominate. Not true. He is there to represent the people who put him there and to uphold the constitution. Republicans never should've voted for Ginsberg based on her unconstitutional views, rather than voting for her in spite of her wacky leftist views.
Bush has created a disturbing precedent in choosing Roberts and Miers. He has sent the unmistakable message that known conservatives need not apply. Some will say, "...but look at his appellate appointments." Sure, he made excellent appellate appointments, but he left them to twist in the wind in his first term. I'm sure the stealthy nature of his SC nominations are not lost on his appellate appointments, either.
He's also damaged Christian conservatives with his behind the scenes re-assurances that, "...she's gonna vote the right way." In a way, confirming liberals fears that conservatives want a Christian activist judge. Thankfully, aside from Dobson selling out, Christian conservatives have not endorsed Miers.
Conservatives need to press Miers during the confirmation hearings instead of giving her a pass. She may or may not do well, but Bush, the Nixon Republican, has slighted conservatives for the last time.
I am a Christian conservative and I endorse Harriet Miers.
And not once, not one little bit, did your post criticize Miers as a person or potentially outstanding jurist. It criticized the stealth, and the message that George Bush is using to defend the pick.
Good post, and in the spirit of the Federalist Society, I hope somebody steps up and rebuts it in a substantive way.
I won't, but that's because I agree with your analysis.
And so I ask you as I asked others. Name me one Judicial nominee that Bush has put on the court that has adjudicated as ANYTHING BUT a strong conservative strict constructionist Judge. JUST ONE! EVERY JUDGE Bush has put up has been the kind of judge he said he would put up in 1999. And you can't prove otherwise. I with that Border control was tighter and the budget was smaller, but that doesn't mean I'm going to turn on Bush because he isn't doing it the way I would. He's the President, not me, and he has information that you and I do not and never will have. And he KNOWS Harriet Miers. YOU do not.