My humble opinion is this:
Throwing it back does nothing. It’s a futile effort, that really doesn’t even have much symbolism, given the recent history. Unfortunately, she was presented with the choices she had and I’m sure made what she felt was the best decision. Of course, I believe a person can be pro-choice/pro-life politically, and see things differently through a judicial eye, but I know nothing of either candidate.
My questions would be: Is the other candidate pro-life? (Being a rabid environmentalist, I doubt it.)What critera did Gov. Palin make the decision on? How did the two candidates match up on other judicial decisions/opinions?
Good point, the so called pro-choice candidate may have been considerably more pro-life than the other choice.. For all we know based on the article, the candidate chosen may have been labeled pro-choice by some group that even considers life of the mother issues as pro-choice.
Reading about the other choice, Smith, he is a radical hippie who makes the 9th Circuit look Conservative.. Looks like Palin made the best choice with what was presented her.