Embedded deep in the argument by Rush Limbaugh that President Bush’s nomination of Harriet Miers for the Supreme Court is “weak� is the age old argument that in moderation there is ambivalence, that one loses conviction when one seeks the middle ground.
I can assure you from personal experience as a reporter, Mr. Limbaugh, that in that aspect you are mistaken.
Like other staunch conservatives, Limbaugh is disappointed that the President didn’t use his victory with the Roberts confirmation to nominate a true-blue, card carrying banner waver to further cement the Court’s position on issues like abortion.
Democrats were calling for someone more in tune with “mainstream� America, which of course is politico-speak for someone with views closer to theirs.
President Bush has painted his choice as a trail blazer, a woman who rose to head a powerful and male dominated Texas law firm, a woman of deep religious and ethical standards.
For the far right, that “she’s a conservative, trust me� approach doesn’t seem to be enough. Because Miers doesn’t shout her conservatism from the rooftops, the far end of the spectrum doesn’t believe she possesses the strength to see her views through to the bitter end.
Because she is a woman of ethical conviction, she might realize once on the court the magnitude of the job and actually weigh both sides of a decision before casting her vote.
Oh, the horror.
Reason, it seems, remains the hobgoblin of zealousness.
Bush’s choice does raise the issue of whether he made a hire on the basis of gender, since the pressure was on to replace a woman with a woman.
And yes, she’s White House counsel to the President, which sparks complaints of cronyism or praises that he chose someone he knows thoroughly depending on the view.
And yes, Miers’ lack of judicial experience is a bit puzzling too, since to the casual observer it looks a little like someone made it to the Super Bowl without ever really playing football.
Frankly, I don’t know if the President’s choice is a good one because I don’t know enough about the candidate, and given recent experiences with the confirmation process I would expect yet more political heat but little real light shed on the nominee.
It appears that it is that very essence of the unknown that is causing fear on both sides of the aisle as that process moves forward.
But shouldn’t qualities like quiet competence and reason along with a willingness to step away from the fringe be traits we strive for in our judges?
I don’t know, Mr. Limbaugh, but it seems to me like there’s a lot of strength in that.