Fuckin’ A – Miers withdraws
Miers withdraws! Good.
Where do we go from here?
Janice Rogers Brown or Alex Kozinski get my vote.
Update: Say, you think this is to counter the Fitzmas that will supposedly occur when indictments are handed down? Because I’ll tell you now, if Bush nominates Brown or Kozinski, it wouldn’t make a bit of difference to me if Karl Rove and Dick Cheney both strangled hookers. Or puppies.
Update 2: Don Surber says:
OK, I was wrong. You were right. Hey, was it worth killing the Bush presidency? Prediction: Democratic Congress in 2006. That means winning 24 of 33 Senate seats. They will do it.
Happy?
I think a loss would force these guys to get back on track. But given Surber’s track record on predictions . . .
Update 3: Cam Edwards:
How long before someone on the Left suggests her entire nomination was a Rovian plot to distract from any possible indictments handed down by Patrick Fitzgerald? You know, nominate her with the idea that she’ll withdraw the day indictments are handed down in order to distract the media with two big stories?
I give it 90 minutes. I’m sure you can find a comment either on Democratic Underground or Daily Kos.
I am far from liberal and think that is highly likely.
October 27th, 2005 at 9:50 am
Miers Withdraws!
My initial reaction…I would have liked to have seen her go to the hearings…but considering how divisive the nomination was, it’s probably for the better…more later…
The initial CNN report suggests that the ‘cover&#…
October 27th, 2005 at 10:12 am
What if he nominates Gonzalas?
October 27th, 2005 at 10:15 am
Oh sure, kill my buzz.
October 27th, 2005 at 10:19 am
Surber’s record is suspect. No way the Dems can win that many seats. Bush and co are looking like fools right now, but the opposition party is even lamer.
October 27th, 2005 at 10:19 am
Brown and Kozinski get my votes as well, but I don’t think Bush would ever nominate a Kozinski (unfortunate as that may be).
October 27th, 2005 at 10:24 am
Heh, we were just sitting in our conference room talking over coffee (while looking over the White House) this morning about Rover being this smart .
October 27th, 2005 at 10:25 am
BTW, I think serious consideration should be given to Fairfax CountyVirginia General District Court Judge Ian M. O’Flaherty. Don’t know if he’s a Democrat or Republican, but he certainly has a clue.
October 27th, 2005 at 12:01 pm
The Democrats aren’t going to take control of Congress. Period.
There’s over a year to go until the next election. Alot can happen during that time. The Republicans will hold both houses of Congress and probably add a couple of seats in the Senate.
This is because:
1. Things will continue to get better in Iraq;
2. Gas prices will continue to fall;
3. Bush will start pretending to be conservative again;
4. No one will even remember who Scooter Libby was;
and, the most important of all,
5. Howard Dean is Chaiman of the Democrat party.
October 27th, 2005 at 12:56 pm
You are certainly more sanguine than I am about our ability to get 50 affirmative Senate votes for a strident conservative with a lengthy record.
Few people are half as conservative as I am, but I think that the conservatives completely blew what would have turned out to be the appointment of a very conservative justice.
If any of the conservative stalwarts get bounced because Senators McCain, Chafee, Hagel, Voinovich and the 2 gals from Maine vote against him or her, or if Bush nominates Gonzales, I won’t have much sympathy for you, the boys at NRO, or any of the other conservative bloggers I read everyday.
Please don’t ban me. I really like your blog (and your obsession with guns). I just think that many conservatives have exercised poor judgment on this one.
October 27th, 2005 at 12:57 pm
It would take a lot more than disagreement to get banned here. Uncle is very pro-first amendment.
October 27th, 2005 at 12:59 pm
Chris, I don’t ban people unless they’re spammers. It’s true, we could regret this but it is a litmus test. It’s an opportunity for the Rs to state right now whether they’re serious about this conservative business. If they let us down, it’s our doom (and theirs too).
October 27th, 2005 at 1:01 pm
Captain Holly:
Just curious, which of these seats do you suppose are in play? I can see Conrad (D-ND) and Ben Nelson (D-NE), and maybe Jeffords (I-VT) or Dayton (D-MN), but that’s about it. And on the other side, you’ve probably got Santorum (R-PA), and Chafee (R-RI) vulnerable, and maybe Talent (R-MO). I just don’t see all that much if any shift of power in the Senate in 2006.
October 27th, 2005 at 1:07 pm
That’s a bit much, don’t you think? Your worst-case scenario here is a continuation of the status quo, and while there may be things you don’t like about the status quo, I’d hardly call your life worthy of doom and gloom.
And this highlights another point of disagreement for us. You seem to think that the Republicans are getting beat up because they’re not really all that conservative, whereas I think that’s how they got control in the first place. They pretended to be liberal on just enough issues (think fancy environmentalist names like “Clear Skies” and “Healthy Forests”), and actually were liberal on others (think prescription benefit in Medicare) to get and hold power.
The truth is, when push comes to shove, the vast majority of Americans don’t want the type of strict constitutional interpretation that judicial conservatives advocate. It’s a good issue for rallying a vocal minority, but I think they know if they actually did it, once the rulings started coming down, the backlash would be huge.
October 27th, 2005 at 1:18 pm
Doom was a strong word. Perhaps disappointment is better. But it will be their doom because elections in this country are close and small minorities can mean the difference between win or lose.
vast majority don’t want that? I’ll need a cite for that. I’d almost buy majority but not ‘vast’ majority.
October 27th, 2005 at 1:22 pm
I share (what I believe to be) your disgust with the abandonment of our party’s conservative convictions.
I started with Bush 41 when he morphed into a Clintonesque, apolitical hermaphrodite.
I am concerned about the Senate open seats, but I haven’t started watching them closely yet.
I am hopeful about getting a conservator successor to O”Connor, but it kind of puts me on pins and needles.
FWIW, whenever I disagree with any of my brethren (like you guys), I do so respectfully.
Let’s hope that we get a good one real soon to rally around.
My pick would be JRB.
October 27th, 2005 at 2:18 pm
Tgirsch:
Depends on turnout. I also think that doddering old “Sheets” Byrd of WVa is very vulnerable.
Either way, I think we both agree that talk of a Democrat takeover is pure partisan fantasy.
October 27th, 2005 at 2:19 pm
Oh, and one more reason the Democrats won’t take control of Congress:
Cindy Sheehan refuses to shut up.
October 27th, 2005 at 2:38 pm
There’s no way the Dems will take control of the Senate in 2006. They’d have to win all 17 contested seats controlled by Dems, plus take 6 of the 15 seats controlled by Reps, plus Jefford’s Indy seat. 2006 map. They’ll be lucky to keep the status quo.
October 27th, 2005 at 3:09 pm
as to liberal claiming rove plot.
there was one I read who said that from the beginning.
October 27th, 2005 at 3:39 pm
Uncle:
Polling report is overwhelmed with Miers stuff, but buried in there you’ll see poll numbers showing that only about a third of those polled want the court to become “more conservative” than it currently is. So maybe two-thirds isn’t a “vast majority,” but it’s certainly a solid one. And something like 31% of the country is concerned that Bush’s nominees are “too conservative” as opposed to 10% who say “not conservative enough.”
A fine example of where “conservative” jurisprudence would be unpopular concerns the “so-called” (according to judicial conservatives, anyway) right to privacy:
And the term “vast majority” may actually apply in that case: