Just as I post the previous entry, I see a couple of FindLaw articles on President Bush's ideas for judicial nominees.[1][2] The reports are undoubtedly twisted to reflect the hopes of the liberal media, but they are all I really have to go on here. They are not really good news at all.
While I admire President Bush's loyalty to his friend, which leads him to request that conservatives "tone down" the "rhetoric,"[3] I tend to agree with Mr. Buchanan[4] that this is not an effective strategy for those of us concerned about this nomination to take. The liberals certainly will not "tone down" their "rhetoric," why should we? It is said that the squeaky wheel gets the grease after all. If President Bush would like to see attacks on his friend from both sides cease, then he needs to simply make it clear that Mr. Gonzales will not be nominated.
As it stands however, I think that the media may be accurate in thinking that President Bush is holding out to nominate Mr. Gonzales. This coincides well with the news that President Bush will not have a "litmus test" on abortion. While I think this news is meant to reassure the right, in a climate where such "litmus tests" typically mean "do you support Roe v. Wade?", I am disturbed by it because I want to see a "litmus test" in this case: I want a justice who will vote to end the tragedy of abortion when it next faces the court. I believe that such a vote coincides well with the stance a strict constitutionalist would take, and so I do not see any hypocrisy or paradox here. If I did not think they matched, I would be more conflicted, but would probably end on favoring a strict constitutionalist, without a firm reading of the constitution, no progress can truly happen, but will rather shift with the politics of the court.
[1] Pickler, Nedra. "Bush has revealed a few clues
about his ideal candidate for Supreme Court" FindLaw 2005-07-06
http://news.findlaw.com/ap/o/51/07-05-2005/0c0b002bf32d28dc.html
[2] The Associated Press. "Bush says 'no litmus test' on abortion for
Supreme Court nominee" FindLaw 2005-07-06
http://news.findlaw.com/ap/o/51/07-06-2005/4e600002f3f3a316.html
[3] Malkin, Michelle. "NO, YOU 'TONE IT DOWN'" 2005-07-06.
http://michellemalkin.com/archives/002922.htm
[4] Buchanan,
Pat. "The Judges War: An issue of power" World Net Daily (On-Line).
2005-07-06 http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=45139