Posted on 10/09/2005 3:28:25 PM PDT by Pukin Dog
2. How many times does the point have to be made that the squishy senators do NOT want a fight and won't vote with a conservative nominee, which means a LOSS, and increased prestige and perceived power for the democrats?
3. Any browbeating of a woman would not be shown on TV. The media is too smart for that. Selected clips of the hearings would be shown with liberal "analysis."
All of this armchair strategizing is based on supposition. You suppose that the nominee would stand up to be trashed, you suppose that the Republican senators would vote to confirm (which didn't work too well with John Bolton) and you suppose the television networks would show a woman being browbeatten.
In fact, you ask us to follow your strategy based on faith that it will work. If I have to have faith in someone, I will stand with the President, rather than someone strategizing on his computer.
During the 2000 election, there was much rhetoric about "taking back the Senate" so Conservatives could once again reshape the USSC.
The President declared, from his '04 re-election, he had aquired substantial political capital - so why he is now not willing to expend it upon one held more closely to the conservative right is at the least questionable. If he's reluctant to "spend" that capital NOW on such an important issue as shaping the USSC, what OTHER issue could possibly be more important for which to reserve it?
I'm with you - "There's a monkey's paw on the presidency somehow.."
kinda thought this might be in the works....
enter Janice.
tough, and would be hard for the Dems to gang up on without looking like lousy racist idiots.
I won't believe this until it's posted in a thread that begins with "I got this e-mail...." :)
Absolutely.
What a turn around this thread just made!
Well, crap.
I guess the only good news out of this is that a Gonzalez nomination isn't going to happen.
If he withdraws her, I'm done with them all.
I'm sick of this crap -- and I'm sick of the Buchananites on this site that are intent on running this party in the ground.
Now they are trashing the First Lady; frankly, I don't want to be in a party with people like them running it.
Now, that is the dumbest thing I've ever heard on this forum. Just the absolute dumbest.
Dammit! Just when I was starting to get used to idea of her getting in...ugh! Now we have to go through this again?!?!? I hope the president can find someone in time that can be equal to, or better than, Judge Roberts. (Unfortunately, none of us FReepers could get in there, methinks...LOL.) Is there anyone else being considered for the position?
I don't know what to think now, if this happens...
President Bush is known for his loyalty....
I hate politics!
I'd wait for a credible source before I went off the deep end.
You are out of your ever loving mind if you think he's going to withdraw her and not immediately put somebody up.
Whoever your "source" is, you need to have their IQ checked.
Glad you're back, PD, but it's absolute lunacy to believe the president wouldn't send anyone up to replace Connors. I'm not saying that isn't what your source told you, but they are wrong.
Many were considered, most said no, some had 'baggage'. Sandra Day O'Conner will finish out the term. Then Senators can go through this next year RIGHT BEFORE the elections.
"I hate politics!"
I love it. More drama than the worst soap opera and, it effects you. Everyday a new story!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.