Replies

There's more. I think the Bush administration needs to take a lesson from its failure to nominate Estrada. The objections from the Democrats that Estrada had never served as a judge and hadn't been forthcoming in his answers to the Senate have at least some merit. Bush and his cabinet need to be more careful about whom the nominate, or as in the case of Estrada -- who did seem brilliant in many ways, how the nominees are handled during their approval proceedings. Bush needs to choose people who can answer these tough questions from the Senate with authority, and with persuasive power; then the appointees need to be given the freedom to express themselves to the American people. I am not convinced that the current crop of nominees is the best possible. For example, Priscilla Owens has developed a reputation for being slow to return her decisions and has failed to recuse herself when given cases that involve parties who have donated to her own election campaign. In the case of some of these nominees, Bush can and should do better with the candidates themselves.

He might even learn from Gov. Grayout Davis - Davis has a policy of only picking Superior Court judges to be appellate judges. Perhaps W. might consider a similar policy on the federal bench and pick district judges for the court of appeals. The Rats might have a harder time justifying a fillibuster of someone they already voted to confirm.

This was during Estrada, but it's still appropriate,

Why Frist and all won't go 24/7 (Vanity)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/958139/posts

Also, this is even better,

Lessons of the Estrada Defeat
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/976173/posts