You Can’t Ask An Umpire THAT

Bryan’s Fischer’s response to criticisms of the IVA’s Judicial Questionnaire in the Lewiston Tribute had one section that summarized the whole controversy:

Imagine you were a league official interviewing prospective umpires.

“Will you faithfully apply the rules of baseball?”

“Of course.”

“Well, what about the ‘three strikes and you’re out’ rule?”

“Well, I really can’t comment on that because I might actually have to call a game behind the plate someday.”

It’s no less ridiculous when a prospective judge says he will uphold the whole constitution, but refuses to commit to upholding its parts. But in his case, the stakes are far higher.

The IVA questionnaire has been grossly misrepresented, but I do understand why even some of the conservatives didn’t return the questionnaire. As this vote is before a Judicial Council that most people have suspicions about, but little clue for sure whether the Council’s decision will be liberal or Conservative. If I’m a Conservative in that room, do I take the risk of being one of two or three candidates to answer the thing or do I lay low and try to play my cards right?

I think the candidates chose to lay low for now. When in a process like this, you don’t want to give people a reason to eliminate you from consideration.

It’s understandable in the face of a little known or understood State Council, but we better get some answers before the next election.