Come on, you're like a week too late.
Posted on 10/09/2005 8:17:01 AM PDT by jaime1959
It will readily be comprehended, that a man who had himself the sole disposition of offices, would be governed much more by his private inclinations and interests, than when he was bound to submit the propriety of his choice to the discussion and determination of a different and independent body, and that body an entire branch of the legislature. The possibility of rejection would be a strong motive to care in proposing. The danger to his own reputation, and, in the case of an elective magistrate, to his political existence, from betraying a spirit of favoritism, or an unbecoming pursuit of popularity, to the observation of a body whose opinion would have great weight in forming that of the public, could not fail to operate as a barrier to the one and to the other. He would be both ashamed and afraid to bring forward, for the most distinguished or lucrative stations, candidates who had no other merit than that of coming from the same State to which he particularly belonged, or of being in some way or other personally allied to him, or of possessing the necessary insignificance and pliancy to render them the obsequious instruments of his pleasure.
(Excerpt) Read more at usinfo.state.gov ...
Already posted here
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1497352/posts
Don't know why it didn't come up in search.
Mine's annotated, too :-)
Come on, you're like a week too late.
Thanks for the post. Quickly, in the first paragraph, you find that it is not the president's perogitive to pick whomever he chooses. Proving points that I argued in other posts that Ginsberg should've been voted down as well as, Miers.
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.