The Right Coast

October 26, 2005
And furthermore
By Tom Smith

Another reason not to give W any slack is this. Remember how you felt about those Democrats who defended Clinton when he didn't deserve it? The feminists who suddenly thought sex was personal instead of political? The civil libertarians who saw nothing sinister in the way anybody who attacked the Bill and Hillary show were systematically demonized, as if there was nothing scary about an IRS or FBI as long as the Democrats were in the White House. One rightly thought they were hypocritical party hacks, not to be taken seriously. Well, I have no intention of being that kind of Republican. If you can't come out and call an unbelievably, surreally awful nomination exactly that, what good are you? Hugh Hewitt is just embarrassing himself, showing with every day he carries on that he does not understand what the last 25 years or so of conservative jurisprudence has been about.

And besides, the nomination of Professor Bernake as Fed Chairman shows W can make a good nomination if he wants to. He got some good advice there. So macroeconomics is serious stuff, but for constitutional law, a crash course will do. How would Wall Street and the rest of the world feel if W had nominated some personal banker friend from Texas to be chairman of the Fed and said, oh, don't worry, he can pick up everything he needs to know about inflation targets and credit channels on the job, ho ho. Everyone's hair would stand on end. But law, heck, anybody can do that. Economics is science, but law is just personal opinions, I guess. I actually think economics is a lot more scientific than law, but that's no reason to insult all the conservative lawyers in the country with his nomination. What did conservative lawyers ever do to hurt Bush?

I hope Miers withdraws before the hearings, because I can't bear to watch them. I only recently recovered from the Thomas hearings. Unbearably awful. My in-laws thought I was losing my mind, and they were probably right.