Bush court statements wrongly criticized

I was listening to a talk radio show this morning who was highly critical of Pres. Bush's remarks about the nomination process. The items rebuked were 1) concern about the dialogue and tone of the debate 2) his offence at the criticism of Gonzales 3) not having a litmus test. This host was calling for the tone to be a hotly contested debate instead of gentlemenly, get over criticism of Gonzales and that he should have a litmus test.

I then saw the context of these statement in a USAToday interview at:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2005-07-04-qanda-bush_x.htm

He only stuck up for Gonzales when asked about it and did not go out of his way to bring it up. And the same with the other two items, they were responses to questions asked of him and were consistent with what he said in the past on these items. I understand the catalyst behind those words is the fear that another Suetor, Kennedy or even O'Connor will be selected. I also have those fears, but the answers in the interview made me feel better about the situation. For Bush to use heated rhetoric or to telegraph his plan is a sure recipe for failure. It all boils down to how much he is like his father. If he is too much like his father, we will get a liberal judge. If he is what I think he is, we will get a judge we are 85% satisfied with - which is someone to the right of O'Connor but to the left of Scalia.

I have the same misgivings as this host, but that does not warrant taking statements out of context and assigning your own meaning.