Sounds like Edith Clement is being seriously looked at.
And, the attacks are starting. After reading only praise for her the past couple days, there are now attacks starting to form on this thread saying she is "not conservative."
The dynamics of people's interaction is fascinating.
Until there was serious chance she was going to be picked, nobody said a peep but she would be a great pick.
Now that it looks like she is seriously in the running here, people are suddenly asking if she is conservative.
Well, where were you yesterday, you gadflies? Where were you criticizing her record before?
I frankly don't know what her record is, but I would have thought I would have seen some criticism on here when she was a dark horse candidate if there was something to be concerned about.
They were too busy going after Gonzales, that was not to be appointed.
Her written record is very sparse al la Souter. Like Souter she has spent most of her time as Distrcit Judge, thus no written record. I have and will again criticize the appointment of question marks to the SCOTUS by the Bush family.
I think Dubya has learned from his Dad's mistakes.
That means she was not blocked in committee by the jumping Jim Jeffords Dem Senate. What does that say about her?
Your 'nobody whined before' line don't cut the mustard, because it is asking people to explain why they didn't complain about her when nobody knew who the nominee was. I bet nobody complained about Chester P. Hoofarted, either, but that doesn't mean he's a good nominee for the SCOTUS.
If she's a conservative, we want it in writing. None of this 'trust us' crap. No Sununu 'references.' The GOP has pulled that before. Souters are no longer acceptable. I'll be all for her if you can show me something that demonstrates her street cred. Until then, I'm happy folks are popping the trial balloons. No more Souters.
It's hard to criticize or praise someone of whom little is known.