Foolishness can be defined as taking a needless gamble. There are well-qualified nominees Bush could have put forward whose conservative commitment to strict constructionism is well-known. We have no such assurance with Miers. Bush is gambling with our future and the futures of our children and grandchildren needlessly.
Why take this chance? I'll tell you why. He has no fight left in him. He's letting Schumer and Reid run roughshod over him.
Speaking of Reid, I didn't support Bush for president just so he could capitulate and let the senior senator from Searchlight Nevada choose O'Connor's replacement.
It was a dumb move.
I heard Dick Cheney telling Rush that we (conservatives) will NOT be disappointed in her, and I trust him too.
For the President and for the people who know her, this is not a 'gamble.' I believe in the American legal system.......she is not guilty until proven so, and nothing I've seen about her indicates guilt at all.
Actually, if you look at it from the conservative standpoint, it reveals a lot of courage to buck what he knew would be an initial conservative skepticism to pick the person he really thought was best.
He knows the left is going to hate Miers. If you think Schumer and Reid are being honest about this and the President isn't, I have serious doubts about your judgement.