My opinion on Miers, for what it's worth. I think Dems should be solid

[Walt Starr]

in support for her, but only if the Republicans are split. Otherwise, the Dems should be solidly opposed to her.

[bettyellen]

1. why would you prefer we "stand for nothing"

as far as i've heard this is why we don't have a Dem in the whitehouse. all the bullshit posturing.
wouldn't it be enough to oppose her on the grounds that she has no record, nothing upon which to judge her, and that it's another insider partisan hack appointment?

[librechik]

2. the Dems will never be solid

on anything like this. As Dems we can't object to her because she's a woman. We can't object to her because we believe in freedom of religion.

However,

We can make a huge case for cronyism, conflict of interest, lack of qualifications, and inability to view her records.

Seems like we could get together as Dems on that, don't you think? Even a few Republicans are on board with that, and it's utterly obvious. Will they do it?

Nobody seems to get the memo. Reid is gushing. WTF.

[bettyellen]

4. they should get together on this. join the repugs in the pile on.

why the hell not? * is such a lame duck, we could fillibuster twice, easily. no one wants the shrub to have a rubber stamp anymore.

[Walt Starr]

10. My problem is basically who we could end up with

If this nominatin goes down, expect a Federalist Society nomination to replace her.

[librechik]

16. I know, I know.

or even worse could happen--there could be more vacancies.

We need to make a strong move to impeach and prosecute the president and putsch. No one in the world community will have any trust for any American if we can't legally and peacefully remove an incompetent, criminal and dangerous executive. It has to be very public and this time there have to be prosecutions and jail sentences. We let them get away with too much during Iran Contra, and they have made fools of us ever since.

All because of handpicked crony judges.

If only we could make a coalition with the paleocons to get rid of this outrageous criminal gang and bring back representative democracy. That's my last hope, but only because I'm not quite old enough (in my mind) to expatriate. When the time is right, I'll give up on this place--they are much too powerful and I don't have any time to waste living in a social dictatorship.

But where to go? Practically every place else is worse than here, oppression-wise. Anyplace nicer hates Americans, and so they should!

Nope, we have to get our country back, period. I'm just going to sit here and hold my breath until it happens!

[bettyellen]

19. but walt, will there ever be a better time or reason to fillibuster?

i don't believe the public wants bush to have carte blanche anymore, particularly with appointees.
i think we need to be insisting on "knowing the heart" or knowing "what dobson knows" on the record, before we allow anyone an up and down vote.
this ties into everything he does wrong, the stealthiness, the cronyism, the ineptitude, the corporatist, anti-hummanitarian values america has just recently learmned to hate.
i think america wants to see the shrub on the ropes. i say we give it to him, and show em what we stand for at the same time. time to show some spine.

[rosesaylavee]

3. Dobson loves her - that's enough

to make me lose sleep. So what if she was liberal in 1990? I considered myself a conservative Republican that year. I changed big time - so could she have.

Thumbs down on this one - I think it will be unanimous on both sides of the aisle. NO one is pleased with * choice. No one willing to just "trust" him.

[snowbird42]

8. Pat Buchanan was adamant

He says she shouldnt be confirmed. Says the conservatives should reject her, are rejecting her.

[rosesaylavee]

12. These are scary times when I find myself agreeing

with Pat Buchanan more than once or twice. I have been watching Mclaughlin Group a few times in the past few months. He agrees more with Eleanor Clift than the pot-o-flesh from the Washington Times - Tony Blankley or whatever his name is.

[Skwmom]

5. I wonder what will happen with the 06 elections if she's confirmed

and renders some very conservative opinions. Don't you think they'll be a lot of mad progressives and thrilled conservatives (who in a fit of remorse for doubting Bush will run to the polls)?

[creeksneakers2]

6. I think Dems need to play the larger issue

Bush really painted himself into a corner when he promised RWs that Mier won't change her opinions in the next 20 years. The only way a person can go 20 years without changing their mind is to never listen and never think. That's the exact opposite of what a judge is supposed to do. She's therefore unfit.

If Democrats can pound that enough, Bush could say that she will listen to both sides. If Bush does that, the RWs will go ballistic because they'll know Bush lied to them, and they are probably getting burnt on another Supreme Court pick. They'll desert forever if Bush says that Mier is open to both sides.

So let's say Bush stays with the inflexibility is good strategy. Bush is the poster boy for inflexible approaches that end in disasters. The left could tie Mier and Bush together on the first decisions can never be changed philosophy.

Inflexible thinking is a cornerstone of the RW world view. Will Bush continue to champion it like he did in the 2004 election? I'm sure that with all that has gone wrong, that will forever poison Bush with all the normal people in the country.

Stay the course!

[MrModerate]

7. She's clearly unqualified. That should be the unifying position.

However, there's a tiger trap out there. Remember, Karl Rove (soon to be referred to as "Prisoner 22939292") had a big hand in selecting her. He had to anticipate the righty reaction to her lack of wingnut cred.

Is she a stalking horse for the "real" nominee who'll come along after Miers withdraws? Like Owen? Who has a real record and "competence" to point to? And who will then be untouchable because we used up the competence card?

[BurgherHoldtheLies]

9. I see one big advantage to Miers getting confirmed:

It pisses off the fundies and maybe they'll be so angry that they didn't get the super-zealot wingnut, they'll start voting for the wingnut party.

Let's face it, we are not going to get a liberal or even moderate appointee outta W. At least Miers annoys the fundies.

[Walt Starr]

11. Better yet, maybe they'll just stay home next November. n/t

[Blue Hen Buckeye]

13. Miers must be stopped.

Miers does not have requisite experience and is hence not qualified. Also she is an evangelical and if she 'lives the faith' I guarantee you are not going to like a lot of her opinions. I think the GOP conservative opposition to her is a trick. They know how she will vote.

[BurgherHoldtheLies]

14. And what replaces her? A very SMART, SKILLED wingnut?

Is that better?

[bettyellen]

18. we refuse to support a wraithe. when someone has a record, we judge them

on it, and yes fillibuster if need be.

[BurgherHoldtheLies]

15. BTW welcome to DU.

[bettyellen]

17. if 3/4 of those polled say we should know the judges positions on abortion

why in the world can't we say, yeah a litmus test is what we want. in lieu of any record to judge her on, it's an abosolute neccesity. good or bad, her being an unknown makes it inexcusable to roll over.
and the next nominee, we'lll deal with on their record. anyone against reproductive freedom will get fillibustered. and the public will understand and support it.
we rolled over once. no more. not this time, especially since the shrub is weak, and shown to have such bad judgement in his appointees.