Megan O'Connor from Slate has quoted my words. She quotes me on my reaction to Fred Barnes' story on the Weekly Standard regarding Gonzalez and the Supreme Court Justice vacancy. Read the full post here.
Liberals have mixed feelings about Gonzales: Peer Review's Blogger X says, "Democrats are very smart to publicly endorse a Gonzales nomination "… Nominating Gonzales would be the worst thing Bush could do going into the midterm elections." Phil Gallagher, a liberal neocon, urges conservatives to give Gonzales a chance, asserting that he is a "man of integrity, capability, and faith and conscience." HelluvABurden's Paul Loeb, on the other hand, declares, "As right-wing religious leaders attack Alberto Gonzales for being insufficiently doctrinaire, it's tempting to accept him as the best we can get for the Supreme Court."… But when someone exhibits as much contempt for due process as Gonzales does, we have to challenge him, in every way we can."So, my lovely wife has advised me to avoid the whole double negative, so I will be trying to pay closer attention to this sort of grammatical error in the future. But hey, glad to see Slate saw my comments fit to print.
Some conservatives are dead-set against him: Josue Sierra of A Latino Conservative Blog, writes, "My hope is that Bush will not make a decision based on neither race nor gender, but qualifications and commitment to uphold the constitution in its original intent."