Last month, not long after the President accepted the resignation of Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, the White House began to float the likelihood that it would select as Gonzales' replacement someone who would not be acceptable to the Democratic Senate. Unsurprisingly, they are following through on this move, as Philip Shenon and David Johnston report today for The New York Times.

he White House is closing in on a nominee to replace Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales, with former Solicitor General Theodore B. Olson considered one of the leading candidates, administration and Congressional officials said Tuesday.

Reports of Mr. Olson's candidacy suggested that President Bush, in choosing the third attorney general of his presidency, might defy calls from Democrats and choose another Republican who is considered a staunch partisan to lead the Justice Department. Mr. Gonzales is departing after being repeatedly accused of allowing political loyalties to blind him to independently enforcing the law.

[...]

Aides to Mr. Bush are calculating that Democrats, who spent months clamoring for Mr. Gonzales's ouster, will pay a political price if they try to block confirmation of a new attorney general. The thinking inside the White House is that Democrats cannot call for new leadership at the Justice Department, then block it.

[...]

If nominated, Mr. Olson would be expected to face tough questioning from Democrats, especially over his role representing the Bush campaign in the Supreme Court case that decided the 2000 presidential election, as well as his involvement in partisan attacks during the 1990s on President Bill Clinton and Hillary Rodham Clinton.

Over the past several months since it began emerging that the Department of Justice was thoroughly politicized under Gonzales' watch, it has become painfully evident that we simply cannot have a fierce partisan as Attorney General. Yet George W. Bush, in his infinite wisdom, has decided to nominate another Republican hack to sit at the helm of the Department of Justice.

This move is not only problematic on substantive grounds, it is also unacceptable on procedural ones. Elections matter. The Democrats are now in control of the United States Senate. While it is would be improper for the Democratic Senate to shoot down a Presidential nomination simply because they can, so too would it be improper for them to sign off on a nomination simply because the President made it.

The President must come to the Senate with an acceptable choice for Attorney General -- not a fierce partisan, not one cooked up in 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue without consulting the folks on the other end of the street up on Capitol Hill. I'm sure if the President acted in good faith in dealing with the Senate he would be able to arrive at a nominee that both he and the Senate could agree on. But given his clear intention of sticking his thumb in the eye of the Democrats for no reason, the Senate should stop any move to confirm Ted Olson or any other nominee not suitable to serve as Attorney General.