Hmmm, for his first nomination Bush nominates a conservative Christian, white male who is a tool of corporate America? After all the spin about his wife wanting him to nominate a woman, and the Latino community lobbying for a Latino; after all his efforts to nominate a moderate so he can fill Rehnquist’s eventual vacancy with a Rehnquist clone?

I think what we have here, folks, is a sacrifical nomination. Nominate him, allow him to get crucified, and then the next nomination will have an easier waltz into the Supreme Court.

Of course, if he DOES by some chance get through, well, that’s just a bonus.


~ by realsupergirl on July 20, 2005.

8 Responses to “Politics”

  1. I think it’s hubris.

  2. Care to elaborate on that?

  3. Yeah — I don’t think Bush is being stealthy at all — I think he’s declared himself as having a mandate and is doing what he can to ready us for the Rapture in the next three years. If Roberts is rejected, he’ll probably just plug in Alito or someone similarly ghastly. He’s not backing down on Bolton, is he?

  4. Ugh.
    His approval rating is down and his spin-doctor is on the verge of being indicted for leaking information. I don’t think that now is a good time to be acting tough. He needs a victory – and if he doesn’t nominate a moderate who doesn’t lead to weeks and weeks of fighting, and political bashing, it won’t be construed as a success, long term, for the Republican party. An ugly, drawn out fight favors the opposition.

    But maybe the Republican strategy is to try and bash everything over our heads now, rather than to stay in office after Bush is gone.

  5. I think they figure as long as Congress has the numbers to hold a majority in ’06 and the Dems run Hillary in ’08, they can hang on.

  6. I don’t think it’s a foregone conclusion that the Republicans will hold their numbers in ’06, though. If they haven’t figured out a way to get the troops home, and stop soldiers from dying every day in Iraq, I would be surprised if there is not a backlash against Republicans in 2006.

    I’m not sure how I feel about Hillary in ’08. If the Republicans ran Condi “Bush’s lapdog” Rice, could she win? What do you think?

  7. It’d be a more interesting race than Frist/Warner vs. Bayh/Richardson, that’s for damn sure.

  8. “I think what we have here, folks, is a sacrifical nomination. Nominate him, allow him to get crucified, and then the next nomination will have an easier waltz into the Supreme Court.”

    Would that it were true! I think what we have here is a very clever nomination. This fellow, by all accounts, is well liked by other legal minds and has been named to a federal court and through a Senate process in the last few years. Although he is a political creature, he has a relatively slight judicial paper trail. Senators will be hard-pressed to find a rationale to defeat his nomination.

    So far, the progressive allies who have been working in coalition building up to this nomination are split, albeit in a nuanced way that isn’t likely to come across the TV news. Even NARAL and Planned Parenthood have different positions. Planned Parenthood is with most of the rest of the coalition in taking a more cautious, “um, we need to know more about this guy, but don’t nominate anyone who would overturn Roe” position. NARAL has a clear position in opposition (as does NCJW — see the post in my lj today about it).

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: