Where the Bushes are really at

Commenting on a Patrick Buchanan article, Howard Sutherland concisely sums up the Bush presidents’ politics and their view of judicial appointments:

There is no reason to believe that GWB will be troubled if his girl ends up voting like Souter. Nor is there any reason to believe that GHWB is troubled that Souter votes like Souter. There is no reason to believe that both aren’t happy with Souterian jurisprudence, campaign quotes notwithstanding. I’m surprised that even now PJB won’t drop the pretense and call Bushes what they are: limousine liberals engaged—for over 20 years now—in an ongoing con of gullible conservatives hypnotized by fear of Democrats. Bushes have far more in common with Democrats than they do with movement conservatives. The “justices like Scalia and Thomas” false promise was never anything but eyewash.

To be fair, however, we must give Bush the elder credit for appointing Clarence Thomas and for sticking with him under horrific fire. The significance of which, by the way, is that pa has a better conservative record on Supreme Court appointments than his supposedly more conservative son.

Posted by Lawrence Auster at October 04, 2005 12:40 PM | Send