Posted on 07/07/2005 6:31:52 PM PDT by ovrtaxt
With Carl Limbacher and NewsMax.com Staff
|
|
|
|
|
For the story behind the story...
|
Thursday, July 7, 2005 2:34 p.m. EDT
Novak: Bush's Gonzales Support Frightening
Charging that President Bush may be an obstacle to appointing a conservative Supreme Court justice, columnist Robert Novak chastised the president for his remarks defending Attorney General Alberto Gonzales.
Novak fears Bush's remarks will be seen as a signal that the president intends to name him to fill the vacated seat of Justice Sandra Day O'Connor.
Noting that Sen. Kennedy has managed to establish in the media's warped minds a new standard for "mainstream conservatism" by citing the liberal O'Connor as a genuine conservative, Novak wrote that by contrast, the president "has put forth 'friendship' as a qualification for being named to the high court."
According to Novak, Both Kennedy's and Bush's statements left conservative Republicans, who he recalls have spent more than a decade planning for this moment to change the balance of power on the Supreme Court, reeling from blows delivered by two dissimilar political leaders.
As a result, Novak wrote, it's not Kennedy who is the bigger obstacle to a conservative court, but the president himself.
"While Kennedy's ploy presents a temporary problem, Bush's stance could be fatal," according to Novak. "The Right's morale was devastated by the president's comments in a USA Today telephone interview published on the newspaper's front page Tuesday: 'Al Gonzales is a great friend of mine. When a friend gets attacked, I don't like it.'"
To Novak's politically sensitive ears, that sounded as if Bush, whom he called a stubborn man, might go ahead and nominate Gonzales "in the face of deep and broad opposition from the president's own political base."
Added to the mix is the strong probability that ailing Chief Justice William Rehnquist is on the verge of announcing his retirement.
Such a scenario may give Bush the idea he has political cover to appoint Gonzalez.
As Novak puts it, Bush could "name one justice no less conservative than Rehnquist, and name Gonzales, whose past record suggests he would replicate retiring Justice Sandra Day O'Connor on abortion and possibly other social issues."
If Bush would do this, Novak says, it would be a massive defeat for conservatives because "the present ideological orientation of the court would be unchanged, which would suit the Left just fine."
Novak also noted that O'Connor was not considered a conservative when she was nominated 24 years ago, and writes that "the worst fears about her were realized by her consistently liberal positions on social issues. With Democrats now setting a new standard for conservatism, Republican senators could only bite their lips and praise her."
Novak conceded that Gonzales "would not exactly be another O'Connor, but he is still considered a disaster by Republican conservatives."
"Gonzales trial balloons were shot down on the right, but that has not stopped leaks from the White House." If a Rehnquist vacancy now is thrown into the mix, Novak asked, would Bush be tempted to temporize by naming one conservative and one non-conservative?
"Consequently, Bush's USA Today interview has been a source of intense anxiety on the right. Typically, the president did not defend Gonzales on his merits but with outrage that anybody would dare criticize his friend. That reflects a general schoolboy attitude that is losing the president support from fellow Republicans and conservatives."
I didn't write that -- I found it on a website -- was just putting up the facts. I don't support Gonzales for SCOTUS but I also wanted it out there he is not a member of La Raza outright. Personally I don't like any of those organizations having lived outside of San Antonio for eight years.
I am with you 100% -- I just wanted it clarified and found that on a website that gave his affiliation. I support Janice Brown because it would make the RATs go off the deep end.
Janice Brown is my choice as well -- I would love to see that nomination and I agree that I think he will nominate a woman to replace O'Connor. Also agree that Gonzales will never be nominated to replace Renquist but I can see him replacing Gingsberg later in the term.
That would be hilarious if he replaced Gingsberg on down the line with Gonzales who all the Dems are saying he should pick -- pull out the archives with their statements today.
Have a hunch he knows exactly what he is doing and the RATs are going to come out on the short end again.
I posted the facts -- read on down and you will find out the group he was affiliated was not La Raza per se. In fact there are so many of these type organizations it is hard to tell them apart. Please read what hispanicrepublican has to say about the different groups -- said it better than I ever could because I don't understand them and who is who.
Once again I do not support Gonzales but I want facts not rumors on him. No one can argue if you are posting facts.
It was difficult enough to get Gonzales confirmed for the AG, so why, oh WHY, would the president, who knows that every candidate he's going to send up for a place on SCOTUS and he he knows that he'll have at least 2,more or less immediately, would he pick Gonzales, whom he'd have to find a replacement for? How many damned Dem COMMIE SHOW TRIALS, do you think that the president wants on his plate right now? Bolton is still hanging out there, London was bombed today, we're still fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan, with lots of idiots screaming about how we should get out of both places....NOW, and then there's the privatization of Social Security and making the tax cuts permanent.
I agree. I would do the same for any friend, even friends whom I would never appoint to the court.
Everybody cool their jets .. Gonzales said today - HE IS "NOT A CANDIDATE"!
All this whining and hand wringing is for nothing.
When someone tells them that Gonzales won't be nominated, they either ignore the post, or just continue to foam at the mouth. Don't you get it...they miss the Clinton years and desperately need to be miserable.
They don't miss the Clintons .. they miss being in power .. the president is irrelevent as long as he's a democrat.
That's true.
Any justice who doesn't--in the manner of a strict constructionist--is no justice and is dispensing no justice. Such a person is nothing more than an enemy of the state warring upon the people.
OMG !
You're right, but I'm having my doubts about his state of mind.
You're right, but I fear he's going to blow it, and even the firmest "bushbots" here will be disgusted. I'm not necessarily a Bush lover, but I've always wished he'd do the right thing.
However, I'm beginning to doubt his sincerity on a few things.
The point here is the education of lurkers and to some extent, freepers, who don't know the history of certain individuals. Airing out the past on Gonzalez solidifies opinion against him.
Also, FR is monitored by certain parties. It's best to jump up and down and yell right now, so we don't get stuck with a bad choice in the end. We're just doing our part to keep the GOP to the right.
As far as being miserable, lol! you have no idea what you're talking about. Your crystal ball needs a tune up!
I pray that you are right!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.