NOT just because this article in the USA Today starts with the withdrawal of Ms. Miers from consideration, NOT because of the use of the phrase 'botched nomination', and NOT because it proceeds to give a stale re-hash of Justice O'Connor's history.
Check out the chart of "Failed Nominations" at the bottom of the linked article. In what universe is the withdrawal of John Roberts as a nominee for Associate Justice (in order to submit him as a nominee for Chief Justice) to be considered a "Failed Nomination"?? Oh, sure, there is a note about the nomination to Chief Justice - but the fact is that this nomination never Failed.
This is exactly the kind of mis-use of terminology that prevents me from trusting what I read, and what I hear when I force myself to watch the news. Did the President withdraw Justice Roberts? Of course he did. Did he do so because the nomination was in trouble? Of course not.
 The good news is that no time is being wasted, and a new nominee has been announced. From what I've read so far, Samuel Alito has a strong record from his 15 years on the 3rd U.S. Court of Appeals. All of the conservative hard-liners who were dissatisfied with Ms. Miers should be very pleased, especially the base who have been aching for a fight.
Predictably, the battle of words has already begun. Michelle Malkin has more on the nomination and reaction. Hugh Hewitt provides background material links on Judge Alito's decisions and writings, and outlines the shape of the battle to come. |
|