Tony Blankley: Settle down on Meirs

Tony Blankley says it will be okay. He gives a reasoned opinion, with which I can agree. (added note . . . with which I can partially agree. We might get what we want but then we will have reinforced the idea that the Supreme Court is largely a political role.) Still, Bush's decision caused a loss in the ideologic debate. My objections are NOT to Meirs. I don't know her. I hope she will be fine. My objection is twofold: Bush is 1. sending the wrong message about conservative philosophy and 2. to future potential nominees.

If conservative philosphy cannot stand scrutiny then isn't there something wrong with it? By avoiding a real discussion of limited role of the judiciary, Bush is implying just that, in my opinion.

Furthermore, he is sending the message that future Court nominees need to have a blank paper trail. In the age of blogs, in which young people share their opinions and everything else about their lives, this is dumb politically and lacks basic courage.

Maybe Bush doesn't really believe in conservativism. It is at least a mixed message to say we need strict constructionists, and by the way, let's get a diverse group of strict constructionists so each can lend their own interpretation.