Does Bush really NEED a fight?

Franklin Foer, in The New Republic On-line this morning:

So, it looks like the Bush White House learned from its mistake. This time, they made sure that they nominated a favorite son of the right. And they distributed their talking points early and widely. My snap pundit judgment: They've played their best hand. With the Bush presidency collapsing, George W. needs a base of support that goes beyond Barney. And now he's delivered the right what it really wants--an end-of-days showdown with liberals, where both sides fall back onto first principles and then bludgeon one another mercilessly. The right's somewhat perverse logic holds that these debates actually represent an ideal occasion for propagandizing; that these fights expose conservative ideas to mainstream America and reveal conservatives to be thinking, feeling people, too.

Of course, Bush could have gone right and simultaneously avoided this kind of Battle- of-Somme scenario. Or to re-frame that assertion: Why didn't he nominate Judge Michael McConnell? After all, McConnell would have nearly the same Federalist Society friendly views as Alito. But he would also bring along the endorsement of liberal academia.

My best guesses for why he skipped over McConnell: 1) Bush actually needs a bloody confirmation fight. 2) He probably can't stand McConnell's heretical position on Bush v. Gore. 3) McConnell represents the kind of pointy-headed intellectualism that the president can't abide. 4) He's not physically fit enough to deserve a promotion to the highest court in the land...

| +Save/Share | |