Dear Common Tator,
I haven't argued that the lamestream media are founts of unbiased knowledge and eternal wisdom.
However, neither did Mr. Bush win in a landslide in either 2000 or 2004. He didn't begin his second term with the political capital of, say, Ronald Reagan in 1985. He managed a real, competent, if not quite entirely comfortable victory in 2004, but nothing like the mind-blowing achievement of Mr. Reagan in 1984.
But Supreme Court nominations aren't exactly election battles. If they were, Justice Bork would have been the deciding vote against the city of New London, CT in the last term. The fact is that even very popular presidents can lose on their Supreme Court nominations. My guess is that it's because the opposition can try (and perhaps succeed) to separate the popular president from the nominee.
However, President Bush doesn't have quite the political capital that President Reagan had, and unfortunately, whatever the actual facts of the situation, President Bush is currently leaking some of the political capital that he has as a result of Iraq and Hurricane Katrina. And $3.50 per gallon gasoline. And sporadic gasoline shortages here and there.
As well, the task before him would be a difficult one even if he currently were currently flying high in public opinion. Unfortunately, the media HAVE done a good job of painting truly conservative judicial nominees in very poor lights, and the Party of Satan HAS NOT really suffered much (if at all) for harming these nominations.
The liberals and the media are going to adopt a campaign of, "One for you, one for us." At least, that's my theory. "You barbarian conservatives get John Roberts, but we civilized progressives get a 'moderate.'"
And if President Bush nominates a true conservative, the line of attack will be that it's all quite unfair.
Now, mind you, it won't quite matter whether their position gains majority support. It will only matter whether their position gains the overwhelming support of traditional Party of Satan constituencies. If it does, then the 45 recalcitrants can continue to be recalcitrant.
As well, a few of the squishy RINOs may take off for the hills, too.
It will be quite a battle.
With all that is on his plate, Mr. Bush may not want to take on this battle. And perhaps he will go squishy on us and nominate another servant of Satan Souter.
Mr. Bush sometimes stands strong, and sometimes goes limp. Sometimes he holds to principle, sometimes he doesn't.
He's a politician. He's better for what I believe and think is good for our country than, say, John Kerry, or Al Gore, or Hillary Clinton, but he's just a politician.
So, I will pray that he does what is right, not what is expedient. I will pray that he fights with all his strength for an excellent, conservative nominee. A nominee who understands that the right to life for ALL human beings undergirds our constitutional system. I will pray that this nominee will prevail and be confirmed, and will lead the court from imposing tyrannically the culture of death on my country to re-affirming the fundamental human rights that serve as the foundation of our national identity.
And, I don't believe that it will be a walk in the park.
sitetest
Ronald Reagan won a huge victory FOR HIMSELF in 1980. He did not help many Republicans get elected to the House or the Senate. The REPUBLICANS in the house and senate were worse off after the 1984 election than they were after the 1980 election. The Gipper did better but they did worse. Reagan won a big one for the GIPPER!! THE FACT THE GIPPER WAS LOOKING OUT FOR THE GIPPER WAS NOT LOST ON THE REPUBLICAN MEMBERS OF CONGRESS!!!
The word I heard over and over again in the House and Senate after the 1984 election was that all REAGAN cared about was his OWN MARGIN OF VICTORY.. He did little to help Republicans get back to the number of Senate and house seats they had after the 1980 election. Republican Congress critters back then were TICKED. From 1985 to 1989 it showed!!!!
The media said Reagan had political capital. That was done so they could claim he squandered something he never had. REAGAN had no political capital after 1984. Reagan accomplished exactly nothing in his second term.
POLITICAL CAPITAL IS BEING ABLE TO ELECT OR DEFEAT MEMBERS OF CONGRESS!! THAT IS THE ONLY MEASURE OF POLITICAL CAPITAL. ELECTIONS ARE WON BY ORGANIZATION... not the media or money ... as PRESIDENT KERRY CAN TESTIFY.
Like many people who believes what the media says, you don't understand what went on in the past and what is going down now.
The truth is Reagan, had no clout after 1984 and Bush has far more clout today than Reagan at any time after his relection.
Prior to even running for president in 2000, Bush had studied the failure of the Reagan second term. Rove's and Bush's solution was to make it a major point that in 2004 Bush would only spend enough Republican resources to win his own campaign. Bush would spend money and time not requied for his own victory to increase the Republican seats in the HOUSE AND SENATE. He did it at the expense of his own margin of victory!!! That you may be surprised to find, did not tick off Repubican candidates for house and senate seats. You may be surprised that some feel they owe W a big one!!!!
ONLY FDR had ever made that kind of effort before. FDR Only did it in 1936.... And if you don't think what Dubya sacreficed creates clout... you know nothing of what it takes to influence politicians.
Everyone with a brain knows that the team of Bush and Rove will be major powers in state and national races for decades to come... THAT IN CASE YOU MISSED IT... IS CALLED POLITICAL CAPITAL!!!
It also puts the fear of Satan in the media. The media players are certain that Bush and Rove will be major political powers for decades to come. They figure Bush did a devil of a job in 2004. And they fear the hell out of a guy who would rather accomplish than take credit, would rather accomplish than gain glory, or would rather accomplish than hold office. They are doing all they can to destroy President Bush. It is too little to late.
Their last chance to do that was 2000.
BUSH IS CLOUT WITH A CAPITAL C. HIS ACTUAL DEEDS SPEAk FAR LOUDER THAN REAGAN LOSING SEATS IN THE HOUSE AND SENATE WHILE WINNING 58 PERCENT OF THE VOTE!!! The unwashed don't understand what or why Dubya does what he does. But the insiders know what and why he does things the way he does.
The media did not hate Ronald Reagan.. They can live with a Republican who is out for himself. They are scared to death of a Republican leader who will exercise effective political power for the next 25 years. That is why they hate him. That is why they lie to you.