There's an important distinction between "in the mold of Scalia" and "strict constructionists". The first seems to paint the picture of those who would vote lockstep with Scalia regardless of principles. The second says they would be true to the written Constitution.
Gore was trying to paint that word picture rather than recite a true Bush quote.
But I agree with you that if someone can produce a quote of Bush promising to appoint people "in the mold of Scalia" then I'll accept it.
However, appropos of the current discussion, when President Bush hinted that Miers would vote the way he would like, he was painting his own word picture of someone who would vote lockstep regardless of principle. Whether he meant to or not.
His rhetoric is an appeal to trust. It isn't substantive. President Bush is an executive politician, not a jurist.
I've tinkering with what I think could be a litmus test to justify trust (or understand the ramifications) in President Bush's "strict constructionist" promise. The term "strict constuctionist" is braod sweeping, and tends to paint a iew that conservatives find attractive. We want what -WE- see as strict constructionists.
Would President Bush say that Gonzales is a strict constructionist? We have a record on Gonzales. So, while we can't probe the record of Miers, we might be able to get a handle on how flexible or rigid the term "strict constructionist" plays out from President Bush's rhetoric.
Gonzales is easily shown to be a judical activist, BTW. He and Own were on opposite sides of the parental notification case in Texas - the case literally turns on the interpretation of "strict constructionist." Either Owen is a strict constuctionsit, or Gonzales is, but it is not logical that they both be.
The sophists will argue that the court let the law stand, no legislation from the bench. Or that the court didn't strike down the law, so there was no judicial activism. I say read the case and draw your own conclusion. By the spophists definition, the FLorida Supreme Court was not activist in the 2000 election. But in fact, it was. And so was the Texas Supreme Court in parental notification.
I see a pretty direct assertion of direct quote ... "Governor Bush has declared ..."
Then-candidate Bush gave lots of campaign speeches, it is odd that they are not popping up as transcripts or direct quotes near the top of a google search.
Al Gore: "And Governor Bush has declared to the anti-choice group that he will appoint justices in the mold of Scalia and Clarence Thomas