Wake up, Freepers, this is war.

[Pukin Dog]

“The army is not properly equipped for an invasion of an enemy's territory. It lacks much of the material of war, is feeble in transportation, the animals being much reduced, and the men are poorly provided with clothes, and in thousands of instances are destitute of shoes. Still we cannot afford to be idle, and though weaker than our opponents in men and military equipments, must endeavor to harass, if we cannot destroy them. I am aware that the movement is attended with much risk, yet I do not consider success impossible, and shall endeavor to guard it from loss.” – Robert E. Lee (September 3, 1862 – Letter to Jefferson Davis)

Last week, with considerable difficulty, I posted that I had changed my mind and decided to support the nomination of Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court. I hope that this post will help some of you understand why this nomination must be supported until it is either withdrawn or it succeeds in gaining Senate confirmation.
I make no bones about the fact that I believe that the nomination of Harriet Miers is a very, very large mistake by the Bush administration, probably the biggest mistake that they have made in office. I believe the choice to have been one made in the heat of battle, under duress and strain over the surprise decline of prior selections, against the goal of completing Senate confirmation before the end of November. A selection of a willing candidate had to be made, and the President mis-stepped in rushing to select Harriet Miers without proper vetting.

So, in light of that, (which is all true) why am I now suggesting that Harriet Miers should be supported?

Because this is war.

We Conservatives are at the brink of victory, where the enemy is most dangerous. Just as you have seen in Iraq, at the time of nearing victory is exactly the time when the enemy becomes more violent and deadly in their attacks. It is not because we are losing the war, that we find our leaders either attacked in the media, or worse; the continued attempts to criminalize Conservatives through the legal system. It is happening because we are winning.

We are winning in spite of the fact that our Conservative Army is in very, very bad condition after years of battle against our Liberal opponent. Our leadership in the Senate consists mostly of tired, beaten, scared members, most of them unwilling to take the fight to the enemy for fear of losing the ground they have gained.

In any war, it is always a goal to destroy leadership first. You target and attack the enemies Generals as a common early tactic. Our enemies have never been able to defeat the likes of Tom Delay or Karl Rove on the battlefield of ideas, so they now seek to remove them from the war altogether through continued attempts to remove them from their winning positions. The enemy if successful can weaken our leader by removing his warriors from the fight. Our enemies understand the unfortunate truth that there are only a few true warriors left in our political army, and if they can get to them (through our failure to protect their flank) they can then gain ground simply by limiting our ability to attack them. No war is won on the defense, and on the defense is where we are. We are not on the defense because of the decisions of one George W. Bush; we are on the defense because his Army is tired and weak, and also there are phony among them.

Anyone who believes that an Arlen Specter or a John McCain is going to fight to the death for Conservative principles is an absolute fool. If you think that Trent Lott or Orrin Hatch won’t sell your Conservatism down the river for another 6 years feeding at the public troth then respectfully, you are dumber than dirt.

In war, you must have no weak areas for the enemy to attack, and we have a lot of them. We attack Bush for signing Campaign Finance reform much more than we attack John McCain for creating it. We attack Bill Frist for not going Nuclear; instead of attacking the RINOs who would have obviously defeated the measure had Frist tried it.

In the Miers nomination, I believe the President looked at his situation, and the conditions of his troops, and took the path of Robert E. Lee; choosing not to lose, when faced with a situation where the condition of his troops made it impossible for him to win. In doing so, he repeated a mistake that many, many leaders have made before him. He made a decision from weakness, and that cannot be denied.

We can (and should) attack George Bush when he makes poor decisions from a weak position, but now is the time to attack those who put him in the weak position to begin with. You can’t really blame the Democrats, because they are who they are. We know their tactics and should be better prepared for them. You can’t blame the RINOs for the same reason. If you know your enemy, then there is no excuse for allowing him victories against you.

So where does that leave us?

As has been made clear before; “You go to war with the Army you’ve got, not the one you want”. That is where we are. Right now, we may not feel so great about our Army, but are we going to let them be defeated because we don’t agree with their tactics and methods? Sure, we can stand back and wait, or leap from the train because we are mad at the conductor, or we can dance with the one who brought us, people.

Now, forgive my over-use of clichés, but that’s the best I can do at the moment.

We voted for the man, we stood with him and defeated our enemies at every turn. Victory is near, and our enemy has ramped up their attacks, hoping we will shrink from the fight.

Let us stay the course, and stay on the side of President Bush. He is not a perfect man, but he is our man. In war, sometimes that just has to be enough. Now can we lower our voices enough to remember what side we are on in this fight? Every one of us has the right to criticize the general direction our leadership is taking at the moment. Whether it is spending, the borders, Miers, Iraq, whatever. We should never forget that those in Washington work for us, and are subject to our approval. That does not mean however, that we should help our enemies defeat us by handing over our leaders at gunpoint.

I believe the debate can only strengthen us, but we should keep it as debate and not open warfare against our side. The war for Conservative ideas will not be won during the term of our current President, but I think if we want more and better Generals down the road, we need to stand with this one.

Win or lose, I’m standing with President Bush.

[lugsoul]

Who has been there in the last two days, other than Bono?

[Stunned]

Drink the Kool-Aid.

[Pukin Dog]

Thank you. But as I stated earlier, too many responses to my posts are about me, instead of about the post. I only post to share ideas, not to bring attention (or the scorn of idiots) to me.

At my count, only two posts have touched on why I quoted Robert E. Lee's famous letter. Or is it not that famous anymore?

I wanted FReepers to remember how and why wars are lost, not just another Pukin Dog vanity about himself. I have to take the blame, because I probably should not have mentioned that I wont be doing this anymore. My bad.

[Larry Lucido]

This is Pukin Dog's last vanity post.

So, this is a vaniposupus?

[lugsoul]

Needed sayin'...

[TigersEye]

Her nomination was a strange political decision but the President's choice can be vetted with a few simple questions.

1. Does she know proper English sentence structure?
2. Does she understand the proper role of the Judiciary as opposed to the other two branches?
3. Does she understand the difference between right and wrong?
4. Does she have an appropriate view of a justice's role in decision making?
5. Does she have some solid experience in legal decision making processes?

The Constitution was written so that anyone of average education and intelligence can understand it. It's not necessary to have the pointiest head on the block to deciper its intent. It is only necessary to appreciate the principles it was written to support and have the will, the energy and the desire to discern how the mechanisms it employs were designed to achieve that end.

I support Harriet Miers.

[Pusterfuss]

So, if your Chief picked someone for a key post and there was no indication that person was even in the same league as a few dozen other very qualified people, would you offer unquestioning support for the choice?

You have never been in the military, have you.

[BamaAndy]

Ditto. Thank you.

[La Enchiladita]

The war you refer to, Pukin, is already a quagmire. Why? Because the President insists on spitting on the people who fought for him, supported him, defended him and -- oh yeah -- the people who believe that what is RIGHT for this country is more important than brushing his leadership flaws under the rug.

Do you think Tony Blankley, George Will, Mark Levin, Laura Ingraham, Bill Kristol, Charles Krauthammer etal ENJOY having to oppose President Bush on the Miers nomination? No! It's painful, but it must be done.

If the President wants and deserves respect from me, then it's time he showed me and millions of other Americans some respect. I've had it with being loyal and taken for granted.

[Pukin Dog]

Oh, I've got plenty of vanity. I also have enough common sense to understand when my presence does more harm than good.

[Huck]

The president is weak either way. The choice is a weak president with no Miers on the SCOTUS, or a weak president without.

Actually, all this is just blather. Unless someone posting here is actually on the Senate Judiciary Committee, we've got absolutely nothing to do with what happens next. And since the very clear, very loud opposition and disappointment in this pick has already been heard loud and clear, there's nothing you or anyone can do about it. Just because someone says "I support the president" doesn't mean anything.

Ok. Someone named Pukin Dog supports the president. In measurable terms, what does that mean? It doesn't mean jack. The Senators all know what's up. And they will get to talk to her themselves, and whatever happens will happen. The horse is out of the barn. The toothpaste is out of the tube. Can't put it back.

[JFC]

Well STATED!

I stand firmly beside President Bush. Always have and always will.

[Junior_G]

That is one of the funniest lists of keywords I've ever seen.

[Cboldt]

I'll say this about this nomination. It put the ethics of going stealth on the table in a way that I naver seen before.

I hope Ms. Mires, the nominee, doesn't personally suffer for all of the crap she's going trough, but she is emphatically not the right person for the job. Not on philosophy, and not on ability. JMHO.

[ClancyJ]

You have been saying that same old stuff time after time - you have never supported this president and will not be depended on to support him in the future.

Keep looking for your perfect candidate and get him elected.

[La Enchiladita]

Amen, brother. It's time we realized WE THE PEOPLE have some political capital to spend, too.

[scratcher]

"Your vanity posts are better than most articles posted here!"

No kidding, and more important than hearing about Miers.... mother's..... weeds growing in a vacant lot

[republican4ever]

I agree with you. If we turn against W... who will stand with him? I may not agree with everything he does or says but, whenever I start thinking ill of him, I just picture Kerry in the Oval Office and that gives me the jolt I need to be grateful it's W and not Flipper!

[johnny7]

Sounds like Burnside's pep-talk to his officers... prior to Fredricksburg.

[daybreakcoming]

Win or lose, I’m standing with President Bush.
I stand with you.

Count me there also. And PD is right - this is war and those conservatives who continue to tear Pres Bush down because he can't be everything to everybody will regret this one day.