If your objective is to get a person, any person, on the bench, then this comment would make sense. Our goal, and W's promise, was to get conservatives of the Scalia-Thomas stripe on the bench.
That objective was worth the fight. (And this kind of "fight" has no real casualties, supply lines, or terrain concerns, as Sun Tzu centered so much of his thought upon, making the application of his strategy even less meaningful.)
Once again, spineless Republicans think that they are somehow vulnerable when they stand up and proclaim that they want conservatives in government. Snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. Pathetic.
And that is EXACTLY what those of you who INSIST that we must have a knock down drag out fight simply for the sake of having a knock down drag out fight generally accomplish with the effort!
The Left is currently engaged in a furious attempt to convine Americans that Bush is incompetent and weak. If he'd have sent up a Luddig {for example} and Specter, Snowe, Collins, et al bolt and Bush loses the nomination fight, then what?
And as of yet, there is NO, LESS THAN NO evidence that Miers will be anything less than a Thomas or Scalia on the bench. She said she was worried that Roberts wasn't conservative enough, well more conservative than Roberts is nothing less than Scalia and Thomas. The real spineless Republicans in the senate are the reason that an in your face Luddig type nominee was not the smart choice. And I strongly take offense to your suggestion that because I don't think an in your face fight in the Senate would be won, that makes me a "spineless Republican". I resent that and if you knew my politics of the last 18 years you wouldn't say that. I AM a conservative in the mold of Scalia and Thomas and there IS NO conservative more conservative than me when it comes to politics, and yet, I am comfortable with Miers, so it would be nice if you could be a little less insulting in your posts.