[Cboldt]

Cboldt: I'm inclined to believe that Miers would render opinins that are acceptable to my sense of how SCOTUS should rule. But I am very unhappy with the pick.

Then I'm confused.

I prefer an open discussion of Constitutional principle; correct the overreaching by SCOTUS and other courts into hot-button social issues, the balance of powers between the Senate and the President, etc. But instead of a discussion on principle, we are having a discussion on "qualifications," "cronyism," and "stealth."

I don't like that conservaitism is reduced to stealth. It feels like being ashamed of conservatism, or being afraid that conservatism will lose in the marketplace of ideas. It comes off as "chicken" and "conflict avoidance," not just on the President's part, but also on the part of the GOP-lead Senate.

[Ditto]

It comes off as "chicken" and "conflict avoidance," not just on the President's part, but also on the part of the GOP-lead Senate.

I guess you could look at it that way. I could make an equally strong case that considering other irons in the fire at this moment, especially the War, a big nasty fight inside the beltway would be bad timing when a so-called "stealth nominee" will accomplish the same end that one of those lightening rod nominees would.