Redstate

By HaroldHutchison Posted in User Blogs — Comments (2) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »

One of the general tones I get from some of the critics of nominating Harriet Miers to replace Sandra Day O'Connor on the Supreme Court is the sense that a long-sought battle over judicial nominations isn't going to happen.

I will admit that there are two very incomplete and incompatible theories are in conflict over the role of the federal judiciary.  I'll be honest, I think judges should not be using their positions to impose their will on political decisions.

The real source of the internal debate among conservatives though was the fact that many on the right wanted a big, final, showdown with the left on judges.  A judicial knockdown-drag out - a final, decisive battle - was not only anticipated, it was eagerly sought.  Perhaps too eagerly.

more below the foldFolks had things all worked out.  There would be a nomination - say McConnell, Williams, Batchelder, or Garza.  The Democrats would bring out everything they had to bear on it, and the Decisive Battle would be fought.  After rulings like the gay marriage decision in Massachusetts, or the judges who have imnposed unpopular things on the people, the eagerness is perfectly understandable.

I was ready for a fight, albeit not eager.  One never should be eager for a huge battle.  As Sun Tzu pointed out, the real skill is in winning without the major battle.  And if we must fight, then we do so when we are confident of victory.

What happened?  The President was ready for a battle.  He was probably looking for the lay of the land.  And then Harry Reid gave him an opening by recommending Miers - someone the President has known for 15 years and worked closely with.

In other words, rather than a battle, the President saw a way to make signifcant progress over Sandra Day O'Connor without a battle - and that was good enough.  As another military leader once said, "Perfect is the enemy of good enough."

Avoiding a battle is not a sign of weakness of principle.  Nor does it imply squishiness.  

Principles do not get implemented without winning.  Winning requires good strategies and tactics - or strategies and tactics better than your opponents.  In short, to implement the principles, there needs to be a lot of planning.  I'd rather take a good planner over someone who boasts they will personally lead the banzai charge.