(Page 2 of 2)
The second political disadvantage is a very minor, utterly inadvertent ethical glitch that came to light a full eight years ago. As has happened with many other top judges, she did not recuse herself on some cases involving a company in which her spouse held stock. In her case, it was her husband's retirement account that, among a number of other securities, owned stock in the company at issue.
With the bloodlust of the left at play, the minor apparent conflict of interest would immediately attract most of the focus of the Bush opponents and the media. Fine. It's a proverbial briar patch. Let the left throw her there and waste all their venom trying to make her suffer from it. The truth is that the example is old and minor. As ABC's Greenburg wrote in her recent book on recent court battles, Supreme Conflict, "Scores of judges, unaware of stocks in a fund or portfolio, had encountered similar problems over the years." The truth will out, and if the Democrats try to push this bogus issue too hard against a woman who palpably exudes integrity, they might engender a public backlash against themselves.
A battle over Batchelder is a battle Bush, and conservatives, can win.
Now if only Justice Souter will cooperate....
DVD to iPhone 4 Mac| 1.4.11 @ 5:09AM
I like the space.
I like travelling, someday I'll take up my backpack, treadsroad journey.
vouchercodes| 1.4.11 @ 9:08AM
have a dream is important, but more important is that we should do to achieve it.