"Kritol is a lib looking for "balance", which to a liberal means a five to four liberal majority."
You obviously do not know who Bill Kristol is. He is a jerk. He is an ego-maniac, he is also a self-promoter. I know this, because I know him.
He not -- however -- a liberal. In fact, he is VERY conservative. He is Editor of the Weekly Standard, former Chief of Staff to Quayle, a neo-con, and a well known and well regarded republican. He is not a liberal.
And, so far as I can tell, he is the only one -- the only one, to properly predict O'Connor's resignation before the Chief. That means he has good sources on these issue too.
You are right, with respect to my error about the author of the "predictions". I need to always put my reading glasses on when I sit at the computer. And I scanned the post too quickly and my eye saw the name as Kristof, instead of Kristol.
You may be right about how well informed he is too.
I hope he is wrong, and I would press conservative Senators to find enough conservatives to deprive Gonzalez the nomination. Yes I would.
Bush was wrong about expecting the court to reject the campaign finance law and he will be wrong about any concession that the dims would give him on his next pick if he first offers Gonsalez.
This fight has been years in the making. We need to be clear that we are ready to get on with it. Any concession will be seen (rightly) as a weakness, with Dims feeling they are vindicated and they were right all along. It will not make any other nominations any easier at all.
Instead, Bush should call in six of the seven who brokered the "compromise" on the filibuster, minus McPain and explain to them personally why he picks a non-Gonzalez, in plain simple terms.
He should lay out his case for an "orginalist" pick with those six, and quietly and carefully explain why there is no so such thing as "moderation" or "balance" when it comes to the constitution. You eaither believe in upholding and defending the constition or you believe in judges dictating constitutional amendments by judicial fiat. It is not a matter of abortion, or any other immediate issue. It is how a judge should do their job.
That's the case Bush should make and it is to the six RINOs that followed McPain that he should make it.
Gonzalez is going to destroy the Republican party in the Senate, beyond it's already weakened state.
I have warned Bush that Gonzales is going to depress the Republican base in 2006 and 2008.
People have worked and fought since Reagan and some for longer than that and they are going to feel mightily defeated and war weary with a Gonzales nomination. You will not get the turnout of the base that we had in 2004.