How is it that, over the last few days, you've found yourself wondering whether Alberto Gonzales would be such a bad justice after all?
Funny, I just had a conversation about this earlier this week...
So somehow, at the very moment that the president himself speaks out against "special interest groups" on "the extremes," the New York Times finds itself the recipient of leaks from this series of conference calls between Washington Republicans and leaders of the religious right. The press and the blogs will play up the notion that there's a fight between Bush and his base over O'Connor replacement, but we're betting that's exactly the story line the White House wants to have out there right now.
Oh.
Yikes.
For a second there I was almost buying into the Gonzales-as-the-lesser-of-two-evils scheme myself. How embarrassing.
Warn your friends.
UPDATE: Bruce Reed recommends an interesting counter-attack:
The best way to stop an otherwise unbeatable nominee might be for Democrats to praise him.Posted by sarah at July 6, 2005 11:59 AM
I really am not seeing what you are so worried about with the G-man. His tenure on the Texas Supreme Court was pretty good. He would likely be a much better justice than Thomas, and he has a lot of potential in other areas. Most importantly, he really is the only moderate that has been floated in legal circles.
Besides, it is unlikely Bush will pick him anyway since he could really swing the court with the appointment of someone much more conservative and ideological. All this Gonzo speculation is probably just a distraction while he prepares to nominate Sharon Brown or one of the Ediths to the court.