One of the arguments being bruited about, even by the President in this mornings presser, in defense of the Mier appointment is that in spite of a relatively lack of documentation to establish the views of the nominee, this is not anything to be concerned about, since the President has a long standing personal knowledge of her, and based on this, has full confidence that she will make decisions based on an originalist judicial attitude.
It was similar personal knowledge and assurance that let Henry II to appoint Thomas a Beckett, his long-time friend, confidante, and chancellor as Archbishop of Canterbury, in an effort to subject the rulings of the ecclesiatical court system to the monarch. Said attempt failed, when Beckett discovered and acted on a new-found spirit of independence once he was esconced in his new office.
The rest, as they say, is history, which led eventually to Beckett’s murder, and Henry on his knees before the Pope to gain absolution.
Bush had better hope, that HIS judgement of his personal attorney is more accurate than Henry’s was of his chancellor, or it could well be the death knell of constitutional government in the United States.