Smooth Sailing?

So Bill Kristol suggests (either as inside info or trial balloon) that President Bush will nominate Mike McConnell to replace Chief Justice Rehnquist.

I know McConnell and think he'd make a fine choice. While I disagree with him strongly on certain issues, I can truly say he's got the intellect and temperament to be on the Court.

I question if Bush will directly raise McConnell to Chief Justice when he'd like to promote from within. (When Reagan replaced Chief Justice Burger, he kicked Rehnquist upstairs while picking Scalia as the new Associate.) The real question now is how much will the Dems obstruct and how hard will the Repubs fight back. The Supreme Court, after all, is the gift that keeps on giving.

The Dems are spoiling for a fight and think losing the court means the apocalypse, yet know they'll lose if there's an open vote. Here's my advice to them: remain calm and pick your fights. The Republicans have 55 Senators and are ready to go nuclear, so try to hold on at least until the next election gives you a clue about the public's feelings.

Why sit back and take it? Because if Rehnquist goes, at worst you're replacing a conservative vote with a conservative vote (and someone like McConnell may move in directions no one expects). As far as the position of Chief Justice, who cares? The CJ really has no more control than any other Justice. Even if you just want to practice fighting, why bruise yourself until you have to?

Pajama Guy responds: W has done a lot to address two problems conservatives had with his dad's presidency (Saddam, taxes). If he picks McConnell he allays the fears of a lot of his supporters who worry he doesn't care enough about the Court to nominate and fight for an anti-Souter. Still, doesn't he really have to flip two seats from liberal to conservative to make the Right whole on that one?