Wednesday, September 21, 2005

The Post Warns Harry Reid

Surprise! The Washington Post got it right again.

Is it now okay for [Democrats] to vote against a person who--as Mr. Reid put it of Judge Roberts--is "an excellent lawyer" and a "thoughtful mainstream judge" who may make "a fine Supreme Court justice" simply because the nominee doesn't represent their ideal?

In this morning's lead editorial, The Post chastises Harry Reid for claiming that the President is entitled to little deference on judicial nominees. The Post argues that judicial nominees are entitled to a "heavy presumption of confirmation." They point out that Republicans would have been justified in blocking all 245 judges that they confirmed under Clinton had Reid's rule been applied.

This is exactly right. Elections mean something and the President picks and nominates judges in our system. The role of the Senate is to ensure that judicial nominees are not cronies who are unqualified, it is not to ensure that the nominees match their idea of correct jurisprudence.

Captain's Quarters Take: "Not to worry. Reid, Schumer, Kennedy, and Biden have done all they can to ensure a permanent minority status for Democrats that will take a generation of work to undo."