Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Do not dub me shapka broham

Self-selection would be a negative, but in this case she didn't choose herself.

You can argue that the person who chose her had a personal gain which could cloud his judgment, but there is no evidence that it did, or that he did gain, or knew he could gain. This is just a "possible" advanced by Frum to explain why he didn't like the nomination.

If you pick the right people to advise you, you don't have to worry about them giving you bad advice because they will personally gain. If you pick people who are looking for personal gain in their advice, this particular issue would have been the least of our worries in the administration. Every day Bush gets advice on many things, some of which could reasonably benefit someone giving the advice.


238 posted on 10/17/2005 8:32:22 PM PDT by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 113 | View Replies ]


To: CharlesWayneCT
It doesn't matter if there actually is impropriety involved, simply the appearance of impropriety should have been enough to scuttle this process.

They asked a host of political ethicists and professors of ethics whether the process by which Miers was chosen was correct, and they were almost uniform in the opinion that it wasn't.

243 posted on 10/17/2005 8:50:01 PM PDT by Do not dub me shapka broham ("We don't want a Supreme Court justice just like George W. Bush. We can do better.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 238 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson