Posted on 07/10/2005 7:19:51 AM PDT by colonel mosby
William Kristol, who correctly predicted that O'Connor would retire before Rehnquist, now has a dire prediction. Kristol claims that Rehnquist will retire this week, and that Bush operatives are already clearing the way to nominate Alberto Gonzales for new Chief Justice. Kristol made the comments on Fox News Sunday, as part of the four member discussion panel.
According to this train of thought, according to Kristol, the White House believes that it can avoid Congressional conflict by appointing a moderate like Gonzales, and then balance it by naming a true conservative to replace O'Connor. This would effectively leave the current "balance of the court" intact.
Panelists Juan Williams and CeCe Connolly applauded this notion, and felt it was a worthy compromise. However, panelist Charles Krauthammer warned that appointing Gonzales to the court would be a huge mistake because, by doing so, Bush would "betray his base" and "betray his promises".
William Kristol said that a Gonzales appointment, or any moderate appointment, would be "incredibly demoralizing" and "disastrous" for George W. Bush, because it would completely alienate his conservative base, and cause a terrible fracture in the Republican Party.
There is more than one hurricane on the horizon.
"If Gonzales is picked, the President is surrendering territory."
If Gonzales is picked, the President has lost the war.
Thank you, good observation!
I don't buy Gonzo for CHIEF Justice.
HOWEVER, should it happen, even a SMALL chance of "Scalia resigns", should scare the crap out of all us.
As evidenced by FR polls, there will be some diagreement amongst conservatives no matter who Bush nominates. But........... if Bush nominates anybody the dems find acceptable, I will be disapointed greatly. So, my OK goes to anybody the dems would fight over.
FWIW. (And I am convinced it's closely related to the discussion on this thread.)
Naming him would be betrayal of the pro-life base and breaking a campaign promise.
-------
Nowadays, betrayal of your voting base does not seem to be a problem at all for Washington -- just look at how the illegal Mexican issue/border issue is being handled (IGNORED) -- is that supporting your conservative, patriotic, American voting base?? And not only is it shafting the country, but it represents a wholesale breaking of the Presidential oath!!!
Agree completely. That would be my preference as well. The more right the better, but I don't see it happening. He needs to fight the judicial war the same way as the WOT. He seems to be eager to appease the left too much on his potential choice. I hope i'm wrong.
I understand that Gonzales is at best lukewarm on gun rights and the Second Amendment. That's reason enough for me to oppose him.
What's to say Gonzales might change his "collective" viewpoint on RKBA ? I don't think it will happen.
Clinton got two very liberal appointments: Breyer and Ginzburg.
Clinton didn't appoint a squishy moderate. Clinton didn't have any doubts that both of his Supreme Court appointees would vote the straight liberal line, on every single issue. He was 100% correct.
Why should a Republican president nominate a moderate ? It's absolutely insane !
Good or bad, ( I think that it is a poor decision), Roe is the law and Gonzales, AND EVERY OTHER JUDGE ON BUSH'S OR YOUR LIST, has applied it.
But there is no "balance" on the court. Its unbalanced in accordance with elections, which have shown the GOP winning the past effing 11 years.
The GOP base should feel stabbed in the back.
Kristol wears more makeup in private than on TV.
This is all speculation and talking points, mainly by the demonRATS, to show they are agreeable and compromising. It is just a ruse to get the conservatives into a verbal war, leaving them battle weary, BEFORE a nomination has been made.
Did you actually read the article? Kristol is NOT advocating Gonzalez.
That bugs me too. I am trying to be cognizant of it and am attempting to remember to put "president" in front of Bush when I refer to him.
What EXACTLY has the PRESIDENT said or done, that brings you to this conclusion?
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.