The Court nominee: What Laura knew

So much for the suggestions last week that when Laura Bush said she hoped her husband would appoint a woman to the court that she was actually reflecting his plans, not expressing her own views. Reprinting someone's predictions and insights after the fact is a little cruel, but also fun, so here goes:

From Elizabeth Bumiller's White House Letter in the Washington Post last week:

When Laura Bush said in a television interview last week that she hoped her husband would name a woman to replace the retiring Justice Sandra Day O'Connor on the Supreme Court, a lot of people saw it as a top item on the first lady's "honey do" list. But Republicans close to the White House said that people had it reversed. Laura Bush, they said, was not so much nudging her husband as reflecting his thinking.

The current consensus among Republicans with close access to the White House is that President George W. Bush is interested in picking a conservative woman for the court. Laura Bush's words, they said, were the most powerful evidence so far.

"It says that they're looking very carefully at a woman," said a Republican with longtime ties to the White House. "I don't think she would have said it without knowing something."

Well, she did know something. She knew she hoped her husband would appoint a woman. Like a lot of other people, she is disappointed today.

UPDATE: A NEW STANDARD. The NY Times actually says this:

"By suggesting that Mr. Bush was giving serious consideration to a woman or minority even if he did not choose one in the end, the White House may have minimized any political repercussions Mr. Bush may have suffered by choosing a man to replace the court's first woman."

That's the new Affirmative Action -- considering a woman or minority group member for a job before you give it to a white male. Even Clarence Thomas could live with that.