Replies

The disease that has infected his Presidency with it's massive spending and do-good social programs is the same one that will infect Miers. You will see it over time when she starts making decisions based on what her five star social circle wants to see rather than what the law says in plain English.

I've had the same thoughts as you. On the other hand, I've often said the average man off the street should be on the Supreme Court because they have more common sense than the justices.

Bush is free to pick any man or woman off the street. One need not be a judge or lawyer to serve as a Justice.

Another issue that keeps coming up is the charge that Bush shouldn't engage in "cronyism", but owes this one or that one a "reward" for being a good judge, etc.

He OWES this position to a loyal judge who has shown integrity etc etc, but not to his loyal assistant-lawyer?

Some of the biggest proponents of this appear to be snobbish lawyers. I guess to their way of thinking, one hasn't achieved much until she reaches the rank of judge.

On the other hand, I've often said the average man off the street should be on the Supreme Court because they have more common sense than the justices.

Agreed - it's not a matter of being expert on criminal law - it's a matter of understanding the federal Constitution - and the current crop of 'justices' are brain dead with few exceptions (Scalia and Thomas) on Constitutional issues. There's no requirement for a justice to work their way through the ranks of local/state/federal courts before accepting a position on the bench - if the nominee is unable to fulfill their duties with respect to the Constitution, it's perfectly clear how to settle that particular issue. I'd take Ann Coulter, Janice Rogers Brown or Judge Andrew Napolitano ANY day over W's cronyism picks. There are even several Freepers here that would be fantastic picks - people who owe no political favours, and have demonstrated a thorough understanding of constitutional issues.

Both sides of the Senate seem intent on nominees that meet their political agenda, instead of one that agrees that the Constitution, and not the opinion of a judge, is the supreme law, and that unless it's delegated and enumerated, the federal courts have no jurisdiction.