WP: In President's Strategy, Two Prongs Collide

[kskiska]

Thursday, July 7, 2005; A01

President Bush has long pursued a calculated strategy to build a lasting Republican majority, coupling courtship of the party's conservative base with efforts designed to attract support from Hispanics and targeted swing voters. But rarely have the two sides of this strategy been in such conflict as they are today with the possible nomination of Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales to the Supreme Court.

Well before Bush makes his decision known, a fierce battle has erupted over Gonzales, the former White House counsel and Texas Supreme Court justice. It pits the ideological priorities of social and religious conservatives, who think Gonzales is insufficiently opposed to abortion, against the aspiration of the Latino community to see the first Hispanic named to the high court.

Bush has skillfully balanced his appeals to both groups throughout his career as an elected official, but he faces the prospect of disappointing one side, with potentially serious repercussions for his party.

Nothing prevents Bush from trying to skirt the conflict by naming another Hispanic who would be more acceptable to the right than Gonzales, such as Emilio M. Garza, a judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit. But the uproar over Gonzales, longtime friend and confidant of the president, has heightened the political stakes of Bush's decision and has alarmed some senior GOP strategists.

more…
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/07/06/AR2005070602320.html

[Cha]

1. Tough shite! bush has more to worry

about than his slimey politcial manueverings.

[MGKrebs]

2. The 'Pubs have done an amazing job bringing odd mates to bed.

NRA and Christian conservatives.
Small government and poor people.
Isolationists and imperialists.
Stones fans and Who fans.

OK, maybe not that last one.

[napi21]

3. The Rhenquist retirement will give him a break!

He can name Gonzaales to pacify the moderates and maybe Ludig to pacify the RW. Nobody will be thrilled but nobody will freak either!

[420inTN]

4. B.S. The Repug opposition to Gonzales is but a feint.

It's a red herring, a psyche-out, a b.s. ploy. Get enough arch-conservatives to bitch about how Gonzales is not reich-wing enough to fool some moderate Democrats to vote for his confirmation. They are just trying to sucker some Democrats into voting for Gonzales (as opposition to the far right), so that when the time comes to vote, the reich-wingers will switch their votes at the last minute in order to confirm Gonzales, leaving our Dem. Senators scratching the heads, saying, "WTF?"

:eyes:

[davepc]

6. The anti-abortion people, which all the religious right is founded on

wont stand for anybody who's not ANTI-abortion. They've been waiting DECADES to get some payback for all their support and votes, and have seen their political muscle used toward corporatist interests. Now, the religious right aren't anti-corporation, but evangelical church groups don't care as much about tax cuts and government/corporate cronyism as they do about abortion (and gay rights).

They've given the Republican party 20 years of service, and they've been asking "when will you ban abortion" all those years. And the answer they got from the Republicans they elected was "wait till we get to change the courts".

Well its the 2nd Friday of the month. It's payday. The religious right wants to get paid, and the currency they'll accept is an anti-abortion judge on the SCOTUS.

The right is not some monolithic bloc. They have factions and special interests just like the left. Just so happens the Religious Right/Fundamentalist Christians are a small, but well organized, well funded, and LOUD part of the Republican coalition, and they wont sit still if Bush ignores them or "sells them out" by appointing a judge who is more a pro-corporatist then he is an anti-abortionist.

They've been waiting a LONG time to get theirs, and if Bush doesn't come through to them, one way or another, he'll lose them.

[teryang]

8. Let's have a torture advocate on the Supreme Court

Agree with your red herring evaluation.

Totalitarianism requires the destruction of traditional institutions.

[mom cat]

9. Yes, let's legalize torture here in the US too! I am sure that Gonzalez

would find a way to approve of increased brutality in US prisons and further erode those quaint ideas in the Bill of Rights.

[stepnw1f]

5. A Truly Sickening Site to See

Both slaves to the same monster.

Envisioning two crowds (the fanatical and the greedy) split down the middle with arms in the air, pleading and begging while a giant throws tiny scraps down to them both.

When will the babies turn on each other for Mom's favoritism? I swear they are both twisted and immoral.

The funny thing is.... one calls itself moral because it isn't. The other pretends morality doesn't even exist. Do they both realize how the other really hates them? I'm surprised they managed to keep the peace this long.

PS - who's the chosen one? Will it be the money makers or the easy to control. Which one exhibits loyalty better?

My next painting!!!

[the_spectator]

7. Freeze! Metaphor Police!

"Prongs" don't collide -- particularly if they're on the same tool - in this case, the Bush tool.

worlds collide --

Prongs- they don't really do anything, do they? :shrug:
(to each other, I mean)