I don�t envy the political environment and scrutiny the next nominee to the Supreme Court faces from both sides of the political aisle. Conservatives, however, appear ready to unite and get behind the President, relieved that Harriet Miers has stepped aside.
Who will be the next nominee? Hugh Hewitt was one of the first to step out, suggesting that it makes sense to nominate "a judge who has recently been vetted and FBI-checked." In a hurry (before the upcoming abortion cases), Judge Michael McConnell is his prediction. Otherwise, Michael Luttig or Edith Jones are "obvious choices".
Charmaine Yoest has a survey everyone should take and lists a number of excellent choices in a post that begins:
Ironically, the President this next time needs to nominate a divisive figure: someone, that is, who is drawing fire from the right quarters.I couldn't agree more and Captain Ed seems to express the same sentiment in his question, "Now can we nominate a candidate whose qualities and track record presumes we control the Senate?"Or actually the Left quarters.
Someone whose name is not anywhere near Harry Reid's short list.
More pro-Life Reactions are tracked here.
Updates:
JivinJehoshaphat has my favorate post (perhaps he'll cross-post it?):
Now is the Time ... For President Bush to unite his base and nominate someone who conservatives can stand behind....
Patterico, who has come down off his ledge, seems enthusiatic:
"It�s time to look forward, not back. I sincerely hope that the President nominates a solid judicial conservative such as Michael Luttig or Michael McConnell. Such a choice will do much to heal the deep rift in the party. Conservatives can unify and rally around a nominee of true excellence.La Shawn Barber remains pessimistic, writing, "But I predict George Bush will nominate another unqualified person...." And, the American Princess is now concerned. "We have no reason to be relieved," she writes.P.S. We�d rally around Edith Jones, too. Or Janice Rogers Brown.
The SCOTUSblog suggests finding a John Roberts clone, "an individual with undoubted qualifications, an intimacy with constitutional doctrine, and a most affable personality. The lesson of Roberts' relatively easy confirmation as Chief Justice seems more vivid now. With all of the President's other troubles now, that may be quite an attractive prospect."
Check out the Open trackbacks at StoptheACLU - It goes without saying that we want a justice who will not put up with the ACLU's shenanigans.
Why the Next Supreme Court Pick is So Important .. Is water a beverage? - Myopic Zeal.
See After Miers at Pro-Ecclesia
Nominate Santorum to Replace O'Connor. This would be the best selection for a number of reasons.
1. We know where he stands on important Constitutional issues.
2. He'll be gone from the Senate in one year anyway because he's already 11% behind the Democratic challenger Casey, (who is also Pro-Life).
3. He's only 47.
4. His colleagues would likely vote for him because of their relationship as fellow senators.
5. Pro-Choice chairman Specter would likely shepherd him better through the committee than most Pro-Life candidates because: A) they're from the state, making it politically savvy for Specter to do so; & B) Santorum helped him get reelected recently
6. Dems called for a Senator nomination yet will likely be less prepared for one.
7. Dems WANT Santorum out of the Senate and may be torn as to whether to fight this. The PA Dem Gov. would get to put in a Dem in the Senate for 1 year.
8. Gives Brown more time on D.C. App. Ct making her eventual nomination more likely to be confirmed, more time for it to ripen.
9. Base would rally behind him.
10. He'd be more expeditious and possibly confirmed faster than most judges because his voting record is all public already.