posted on Oct, 27 2005 @ 11:04 PM
I really don't think so. He has a remarkable reputation for rewarding his loyal circle - he's one of the worst in recent memory. He tends not to
really think some of his nominees through. I think that he was trying to do one or perhaps both of the following:
1 - move fast to take advantage of the Robert's victory. For a Chief Justice, he sure flew through the nomination process.
2 - By choosing someone whose record is - supposedly - scanty, the President was hoping to slip someone under the radar of the conservatives and
Rowe v. Wade is fairly firmly entrenched. I don't think that it is likely to get overturned. If Rove is behind this in any way, it is more likely he
is trying to deflect attention to someone else!
There seems to be a shift in the national political sentiment. The partisans on both ends of the spectrum seem to be diminishing. The moderates
finally seem to be gaining in influence. The conservatives attacked Bush to test their influence. And they won. Choosing Meirs didn't help much. Her
lackluster performance does make one wonder if she was a set-up. But Bush's rating is something like 42%. The war is going poorly, with no way out.
The deficit is spiralling out of control, and the Katrina/Rita nightmare is running the deficit to frightening levels.
Bush - a lame duck or no - has committed himself to establishing a grand legacy. I can't see him setting up another failure. Any legacy he's likely
to leave behind can be seen in graveyards here and in Iraq. His only shot is to pack the Supreme Court - and once again, he's chosen unwisely.
I am just amazed that the Conservatives and the Liberals actually agree on something. THis is a miracle, eh?