Of course there is a way around it and there is no betrayal.
He has nominated the rightmost candidate who is confirmable.
Both of those criteria are equally important. Repeat, both of those criteria are equally important. An unconfirmable nominee advances his agenda . . . how?
There is a tidbit above in the thread stating she has recently become a devout Christian. Bush would know this, and its meaning would be camouflaged in the paper trail.
And you "know" that because Bush nominated her. And Bush nominated her because she's the rightmost candidate who is confirmable. And we know that, because Bush nominated her.
Nice circular logic.
"Of course there is a way around it and there is no betrayal.
He has nominated the rightmost candidate who is confirmable."
I would prefer a conservative President who is not scared to fight.
Bring it on you mf's on the judiciary committee. Let's rumble. If you knock it down, well, at least we would relish a fight over principle.
GWB took the coward's way out. He has basically said that he is scared of a fight, even with his 55 senators.
Just fyi, Reagan nominated Bork, I believe in 1987. The GOP had less than 50 senators then. Reagan did the right thing.
"There is a tidbit above in the thread stating she has recently become a devout Christian. Bush would know this, and its meaning would be camouflaged in the paper trail."
This "secret knowledge" rationale is truly mind-boggling. I could really care less what her private religious views are. I want to know if she will strictly interpret the Constitution and whether she has the guts to stay the course when the Wash Post and Katie Courie turn up the heat. Certainly faith could be helpful in that regard. But not a recent faith. Why is that not obvious?
And let's face it. There are plenty of devout Christians out there who don't know diddly squat about the Constitution. They are good folks, but they are also likely to not understand our system of government and how the Constitution protects their liberty. And that's ok because they aren't going to be on SCOTUS.
But from someone on SCOTUS, I expect a hardened intellect, a rock solid commitment to the written Constitution, moral backbone, writing style, and fearlessness.
In short, I expect a Scalia and Thomas.
That is what was promised.
We did NOT get that. There is no way around that.
And the other side of this debate says in response? "Trust Bush and Rove. They have a plan."
There is a tidbit above in the thread stating she has recently become a devout Christian. Bush would know this, and its meaning would be camouflaged in the paper trail. "