This president is best when he takes questions head-on. Which he wasn't doing. First, when asked about Miers being another Souter, he said, "I know her well enough to say she's not going to change." This is Washington, Mr. President. Respectfully, you don't know anyone that well. And when asked -- pointedly and repeatedly -- if he'd talked with her about Roe v. Wade, he would only say that he had no litmus test. When pressed further, he said - in a comment that's going to haunt both him and Miers - that he didn't recall ever sitting down with her, implying he'd never talked with her about Roe. It's inconceivable that he has never talked with her about abortion, her religious views, and how they combine to form her judgment on the subject of abortion. This will be used, effectively, against her in the hearings. Miers is still a very high-risk nominee, for exactly the reasons I wrote yesterday. When the president said "she knows exactly the kind of judge I'm looking for," he set her up for a devastating cross-exam by the Dems.
ADVERTISEMENT
SPONSORED LINKS
The speech our President should make.
A noted economist fires back.
How political can you get?
You might have missed it, but it was boomed in January.
Farcical feminism is a decades-old phenomenon, as George Will's essay from 1970 reminds us.
sidnee| 12.10.09 @ 12:23AM
adidas
cheap nike shox