Sophie's Choice: Dems either back an unqualified Miers or they

[applegrove]

risk getting a right wing nut as the next nominee.

So they have to choose between qualification or ideology. Either way they get one form of "bad governance" or another. And are diminished.


Is the White House trying to inoculate itself from charges of putting incompetents in high positions by luring the Dems to agree?

Everyone is speculating. So am I.

[ClintonTyree]

1. You don't think she shares their ideology?

I'd beg to differ, she's the perfect stealth bushbot.

[roguevalley]

2. or they fight every nomination that is a dick by working out alliances

with pugs either scared for reelection or who have a scrap of shame left.

[Island Blue]

3. It's like The Price is Right

You can have what you see (which sucks) or what's behind Door #2 which will probably suck even more. Either way you loose.

[sniffa]

6. wrong game show

that was, Let's make a deaL.

sincereLy,
a game show geek

[sniffa]

4. they don't have to back

not in the sLighest.

even the (SLIGHT) praise of miers, is nonpraise.

this is a bLuff that shouLd be caLLed; go right for the up/down vote.

[blondeatlast]

9. Reid's damning her with faint praise is his way of calling for it.

It's either the stupidest move he could have made, or the savviest.

From his years as a boxer, I'm going with the latter.

[Carla in Ca]

13. Yes, the latter is correct

It was just enough. Sam Brownback today did the rant needed to open the door for the Dems to ask the tough questions. He knew what he was doing.

[mzmolly]

5. I was under the impression she was both unqualified and a right wing nut?

:shrug:

[ret5hd]

10. you are 100% correct...

once again, so many here, this liberal bastion, want to ROLL OVER!
"we can't risk it"
"we'll probably lose anyway"
"they will just nominate omebody worse"

hey, why don't we just give up and HAND them everything? why fight at all?

piffle!

[The Backlash Cometh]

7. I have a better choice. Bush's fate is in the hands of the Dems, not

the right-wingers. If we do to him what they did to Clinton, I don't think the man has what it takes to take it. If Patrick Fitzgerald gets that indictment going with Rove and Libby this week, Bush's second choice will be someone who can appease the Dems, since they're the ones that will push for impeachment.

[mzmolly]

14. Interesting thought. Though he'd be rolling the dice on that one.

:hi:

[AlinPA]

8. The discussion over her is useless. She will vote the agenda of the

right wing. Same with Roberts. Does anyone really believe the rpigs would put anyone in there that is not pure right wing?

[Seansky]

11. I just can't believe how powerless this admin has made the

constitution. How far down will * push this country? Until we have a blown out dictatorship or kingdom?

[electron_blue]

12. I think she is a right wingnut

[barb162]

24. same here

[soleft]

30. same here again

[elsiesummers]

31. Yep. A white female Clarence Thomas.

[soleft]

32. David Broder says worse - Bork

[barb162]

35. Is he a born again type too?

(I can't stand him; I believe all that stuff Anita Hill said about him)

[bklyncowgirl]

15. Just say no.

A nice party line no vote on Miers. Enough to say "We wash our hands of this appointment and this president."

Would we lose, probably, but like the Man said "What does it profit a man to gain the whole world but lose his soul."

(my apologies to the biblical scholars among us, I'm too lazy to look up the exact quote)

[formernaderite]

16. this woman is a right wing nut...

don't buy all this bullshit about the repubs being upset. What they're really upset about, is NOT getting to get into the ring and fight. This woman is Bush's stealth candidate...little paper, not problems.
We should, but we won't fillibuster this one.
I'm much more comfortable with the devil I know....

[OzarkDem]

17. Doesn't really matter anymore

Our Dem leaders in Congress aren't going to do anything to compromise the support of lobbyists, period. Its time to stop expecting them to do anything and find new Dem leaders.

[ReadTomPaine]

18. I was thinking about this as well, but it's also an opportunity for Dems

I'd be happy to use the time to put the GOP agenda under a microscope. She's tied directly to the administration, so all sorts of provocative questions could be used to keep up the heat on this administration.

With a steady investigatory style critique coming from the Democrats, the GOP themselves can decide of they want this bush fixer or wait for a later ideologue. Let them vote around our bloc.

I wonder what Reid is thinking.

[Phoebe Loosinhouse]

19. sometimes I get so weary of over strategy

And I'm also tired of "pick your battles" and "keep your powder dry"
If a candidate is unqualified as Miers so clearly is, then fight her nomination! If the next one down the pike has a questionable judicial philosophy, then fight that nomination too! Why does it have to be an either or? Why can't we just do the right thing as the circumstances call for?

When people think it is an either or situation - that answer always seems to based upon a perception of a perception - "oh, if we do that, people will think we're obstructionists" or "oh if we do that, we will look like whiners" or "if we do that then we will alienate ___________(fill in some group)." How about we stop living in a world where our actions are defined by what we think some other group of people MIGHT think of us. How about we believe something and then do whatever we need to do to support that belief?

One of the great strengths of the Republicans is their willingness to take on any and all battles all the time. They usually do have a remarkable consistency and a coherence of purpose (which is fun to watch crumble right now)

[ladylibertee]

20. I have to admit,that is certainly something to look at

"Is the White House trying to inoculate itself from charges of putting incompetents in high positions by luring the Dems to agree?"

I don't know, but I am curious.

[Disturbed]

21. Amerika is a Plutocracy.

Amerika does not have a two party system. It's a charade.

[ladylibertee]

22. Oh snap!

[applegrove]

23. Bush hiring "incompetents" is one of the things going against them

now. They tried to lay Brownie at Lieberman's feet - as if Lieberman came up with the nominee for the job. Didn't work.

I just don't know.

[Mz Pip]

25. Miers is a RW nut

BUsh knows exactly what he is doing.

We fillibuster her and if need be we fillibuster the next one and the next one and the next one until he sends someone who isn't a fundy xtian kiss up.

Mz Pip
:dem:

[genius]

26. Oh save it for someone who is trusting and naive. They're losers and fools

Which of their thousands of reasons for backing Bush over the American people with the Senate Democrats pick today? I'm mad and I'm voting "No on incumbents" in the Democratic primary.

[applegrove]

27. Huh? How does being skeptical and asking others to be - make us

trusting & naive?

[applegrove]

28. It is not as if Dems have any control over who Bush nominates. They

don't. All they have is a fillibuster. Put the blame where the blame belongs.

Dems are powerless because Rove WH stole hearts & minds and suppressed the vote in some districts. They already lost the election. So why judge them on how powerless they ended up? Again and again - they are powerless right now.

[Arkana]

29. Or they fight this nomination

and they fight the next nomination because Bushturd* will appoint another crony or another fundie headcase.

[Hawkowl]

33. Fight, stall, filibuster

Until the indictments come down. Then we the people force both the Republicans and the DINO's to choose a moderate candidate that will be above and not linked to the corruption of the White House or the V.P. The dems should be able to use the seperation of powers argument and maybe, maybe even get a dem nominated. The administration will be dead in the water after *'s brain is locked down.

[Zhade]

34. That's what was said about ROBERTS.

Not buying that bullshit excuse anymore. PERIOD.

[Czolgosz]

36. I think we vote against her but don't filibuster. You are right -- it's a

choice between ideology or qualification. In my book we should have the right to demand a nominee who is both ideologically acceptable and qualified, but I also harbor such antiquated notions as each vote should count so what do I know. If I have to choose between an unqualified nominee with a hazy ideological philosophy or an ideologue who's fully qualified to fuck the people in favor of corporations for the next 40 years, I'll take the unqualified nominee.

The truth is we should have filibustered Roberts -- we know he's an extremist judge. We can only suspect that Miers will be an extremist judge.