She said, "Stiff"

Buckethead Buckethead

Peggy Noonan on a larger issue hidden in the littler issue:

The headline lately is that conservatives are stiffing the president. They're in uproar over Ms. Miers, in rebellion over spending, critical over cronyism. But the real story continues to be that the president feels so free to stiff conservatives. The White House is not full of stupid people. They knew conservatives would be disappointed that the president chose his lawyer for the high court. They knew conservatives would eventually awaken over spending. They knew someone would tag them on putting friends in high places. They knew conservatives would not like the big-government impulses revealed in the response to Hurricane Katrina. The headline is not that this White House endlessly bows to the right but that it is not at all afraid of the right. Why? This strikes me as the most interesting question.

Peggy offers some possible answers, but I fear that it might be the last one, "Maybe he's totally blowing it with his base, and in so doing endangering the present meaning and future prospects of his party."

Posted by Buckethead Buckethead on   |   § 5

§ 5 Comments

1

She’s right. I’m very conservative (and therefore stuck with the Republican Party due to lack of real alternatives). I would have loved a real fight over Constitutional interpretations. Instead it’s a job interview with someone we’ve never heard and have no way of judging.

If he had nominated a real conservative, we would have all come off the bench ready to brawl. Now I just don’t care.

Bram Bram

2

"I find myself lately not passionately supporting or opposing any particular nominee."

I'm with Noonan. No, not the one from Caddyshack.

The rest of her closing paragraph, which I saw this morning but didn't focus on, is quite solid:

But I'd give a great deal to see Supreme Court justices term-limited. They should be picked not for life but for a specific term of specific length, and then be released back into the community. This would involve amending the Constitution. Why not? We'd amend it to ban flag-burning, even though a fool burning a flag can't possibly harm our country. But a Kelo decision and a court unrebuked for it can really tear the fabric of a nation.

Makes sense to me.

Patton Patton

3

Me too. Twelve years and out seems about right for me. Long enough for justices to leave their mark; not so long that they grow moss on their ass.

Johno Johno

4

Concur. Actually, things have gotten squirrelly enough that I'd be willing to take my chances with a Constitutional Convention.

Ken Hall Ken Hall

5

Ken, if you were a part of the confederation government in 1786, how safe would you feel about a constitutional convention?

Buckethead Buckethead

[ You're too late, comments are closed ]