Is it possible we dodged a bullet with the SC nominee?

I realize the knee-jerk reaction (which I also have) is to mistrust anyone this administration nominates to the Supreme Court. And it's too soon to tell what might lie ahead, regarding his latest nominee. Who knows what skeletonms arein the closet?

BUT, something we should keep in mind. Perhaps, she actually is about the best we can expect. With so many otehr things to worry about, could one possible mess have been taken off the table?

CNN reported that the administration had talked with 80 Democratic Senators about this, who didn't raise any serious objections. And at this point, Bush is not really in a position to pick a fight on this by trying to inflict an uber winger. So is it possible we actually got a compromise nominee we could actually live with?

When you look at the possibilities he could have nominated, there were many very scary candidates out there. Hard core wingers and ideological strict constructionists (or whatever the phrase of the week is for ultra-ultra conservatives).

And the sad reality is that whatever huffing and puffing the Democrats do, we are simply not numerically in a position to prevent whoever he might nominate from getting in, no matter how awful.

Of course Miers is going to be corporate and conservative. And she's part of the good ol' boys and gals network in Texas. That's a given.

But given the possible alternatives, perhaps we actually won -- at least in the sense of preventing a wild-eyed ideologue from taking us back to 1890.

As I said, too soon nto tell.

Edit: If we had 80 senators, we would have a supermajority, and Bush would never be able to nominate this clown.

It was 80 Senators he ran it by. Which would still mean a significant number of Democrats.

(Maybe thinking of 80 Democratic Senators was a bit of Freudian wishful thinking on my part)

in the whole Chimpy - TANG scandal. She was chair of the Texas Lottery Commission back when the whole G-Tech scandal came out. Remember Ben Barnes?

I'm excited, actually. Her nomination gives us the opportunity to drag all of those old skeletons out of the closet once more. Her appointment is clearly a "reward" or crony appointment, nothing more. She's not even remotely qualified.

you think we may have 'dodged a bullet'? A woman who once said he was the most brilliant man she had ever known?

Whatever.

A crony or Janice Rogers Brown?

Not a great set of choices, but think of the alternatives.

fifty states, the federal courts, the appellate courts, etc., there are sure to be some better nominees than the ones that bush** keeps nominating.

I mean really, lets just stack that court with neocon pandering ass kissers, shall we?

no more justices must be approved from this administration

hasn't 6 years taught us anything???

This is going to take a while to process. The Senate has to do its "due dilligence" and therehave to be hearings, etc.

I just read on another thread that she claimed Bush was the smartest man ever. She must be a real bright one!

I'd just say she was paid to say that about Bush.

and frankly, that's going to be the catch-all excuse for virtually everything sleazy in her past. She's just doing the client's bidding. It's her job.

It sounds like she is full up in the rabid right. Its like having Cheney Jr on the bench.

This woman is no more qualified to sit on ANY appellate court, let alone the Supreme Court of the United States, than any other garden variety business lawyer. I am positive she was selected with the understanding that she would always vote with the new Chief Justice, just as Clarence Thomas echoed Rehnquist. My god, this woman doesn't even have the experience necessary to hire her law clerks. We'll get a bunch of SMU grads whose daddies were big donors.

Bush and the GOP dumbed down Texas education with their teach-to-the-test policies; now they're spreading it to the whole country with their bogus No Child Left Behind, teach-to-the-test; and here we see them dumbing down the United States Supreme Court.

I wasn't saying she's a great choice. And I'm just speculating.

However, my own nightmare was that he'd pick a hard-core winger of the Dobson-Bennett-Brown mindset, with a clear right-wing agenda.

this is a setup to protect the administration from any legal proceedings, a clear conflict of interest. Judges should represent the constitution and legal precedents.

her right now - not while the RW is freaked, she is pro-choice (maybe, I'm not sure but I've seen that already this morning), she gave to Gore, Bentson so she hasn't always been hardcore.

I don't know. I was expecting the worst because he needed a fight to solidify and please his base (that is what I was expecting)and distract attention from all of his other f#$k-ups.

It is Bush cronyism - no surprise there. She pulled a Cheney.

I just can't get all upset right now considering who I was expecting him to nominate which would have caused the Senate to go nuclear and he would pick someone he could only get 51 votes to approve.

We'll see :shrug: .

edit for idiotic grammer/spelling. Hello???

My original post was not a ringing endorsement. I don't know either what will turn up.

But in comparative terms, if we get someone of the O'Connor brand of pragmatic conservatism without a draining battle, it would at least be a wash.

I'd rather see Mario Cuomo, but that kind of choice will have to wait until at least 2009.

moderate or conservative, but cronyism. The supreme court is not supposed to favor a president over other branches of government or any legal proceedings against the executive branch.

I'm liking that she's 60. Ten years older than Roberts.
That's one good thing.

to accept reality. He's at such a low point, he can't afford to appoint a Brown, Luttig or Garza. He's stuck with nominating someone he knows can get confirmed without exploding the senate with the nuclear option.

I know many people on both sides were hoping for a showdown (hell, I did myself) but Bush couldn't afford to poke a stick in our eyes right now.

That is a nice bonus.

still supported him! Ya gotta love it, whether you like the nomination or not.

is "brilliant". I'm sure how she votes will be determined by a phonecall to rove. Another unqualified hack, pure and simple.

Read the article about her at www.buzzflash.com