You have totally missed the point of what you cited, and turned upside its meaning.
"If we compare the publicity which must necessarily attend the mode of appointment by the President and an entire branch of the national legislature, with the privacy in the mode of appointment by the governor of New York, closeted in a secret apartment with at most four, and frequently with only two persons; and if we at the same time consider how much more easy it must be to influence the small number of which a council of appointment consists, than the considerable number of which the national Senate would consist, we cannot hesitate to pronounce that the power of the chief magistrate of this State, in the disposition of offices, must, in practice, be greatly superior to that of the Chief Magistrate of the Union."
Clearly, the paragraph refers to (a) the fact that the presidential appointment will be a more public event and therefore be more exposed to the light of day, and (b) to the fact, which I have already stated, that Senators have the RIGHT to vote as they wish on the issue.
Obviously, what I posted is squarely on all-fours, while what you posted is at best on the fringes. Just one more attempt at manipulating the facts to try to support an exceptionally weak argument. |
