Here's another example of one of the "base" who just wants a big-ass fight. Win, lose, it doesn't matter. They want a nasty, drawn-out brawl that wears out the rest of the country and is just as likely to blow back on the Republicans and Bush as to work in our favor.
The judicial nominee is a tool to be used to beat Joe Biden and Ted Kennedy over the head.
Never mind that this kind of warfare never works. We MUST have it!
I think they would prefer that Bush lose.
And some folks will never EVER learn it seems!
1) Fighting is not always bad. If it didn't work, people wouldn't do it.
2) It does matter if win or lose, but what I suggest is that the real victory is more about conservatism than about Miers. We don't do our belief system justice by trying to sneak it in the back door. As a side note, I think a true conservative could have been confirmed by the senate.
3) The only time the blowback hurts republicans is when they stray from the core, defining beliefs: strong defense, small govt, etc. Fights that allow us to openly define who we are serve to educate libs and expose dems. That is always to our favor because we have better ideas.
4) Someone needs to beat Kennedy and Biden over the head.
Picking a fight just for the sake of picking a fight is not how you do things. Not in real war, and not in politics. Only a fool wishes to start shooting guns and go to war, if the same end can be accomplished without the war. There is more than one way to get a real conservative Constructionist on the court, and it is the preferable way when the Senate Republicans cannot be trusted to back a hard liner. They flat can't be trusted. Do you want to put the future of the court in the hands of people like Snowe, Chaffee, Collins, Spector, McCain and others??? I sure as heck don't! If they had some brass in the Senate, sure thing, but they have proven in the past five years the Senate has NO REAL CONSERVATIVE MAJORITY WILL! NONE! They are untrustworthy, and putting up a known inflamitory well known conservative firebrand that will stir up even moderate democrats, THAT is how you end up with another kennedy, o'conner, or souter on the court. Because the firebrand would be defeated on the floor, if it even got out of committee, and then Bush is forced to pick a real moderate because of that defeat. It is stupid to even risk a major defeat when the same goal can be achieved and he can put in someone he has known for over ten years, that he knows for certain is a strong Christian and a strict constructionist and originalist. THAT is the goal. Not to have a big fight. And frankly, come next November, moderates and swing voters will look more favorably on a party that did what they wanted without picking a fight, and that only helps the Republican majority. Conservatives who don't vote because Bush didn't pick "their guy" are stupid children and serve to only help the democrats get back power. Republicans would be wise to just gulp a little, pray, and see how this pans out, because I believe that by next November, it will be obvious this was a good pick, and the Republican party will be better for taking the high road and not picking a major nasty fight when it was not the only resort. There are plenty of nasty fights still to be had. Like when either Stevens or Ginsburg retires or dies. You think THAT will go without a fight, when you know Bush won't appoint a lib to replace them? I think it would be wise to keep the powder dry until then. Not to mention the fact that Bush's plate is more than a little full right now and was already overflowing before Chief Justice Renquist passed away. I wish people would look at the big picture before critiquing.