Open challenge to the "Conservative" punditry.

[MNJohnnie]

Open Challenge to the "Conservative" Punditry. Stand and Deliver time boys and girls.

OK. Let's forget about your inexcusable conduct towards Miers and deal. The LIBERALS are LAUGHING at you. They cannot believe you are all THIS stupid. They are watching, in stunned disbelief, as YOU do THEIR job in destroying the 1st Republican Majority in 50 years. All you "Conservatives" are all telling us "You can't trust Bush" and "We can win this fight". Well guess what. We have NO proof we can trust you. WHERE is YOUR paper trail?

NONE of you were able to convince the Senate to overturn even 1 Filibuster or get a single piece of legislation passed. So you want us to spit on Bush who HAS a 100% rating on Judicial Appointments and embrace your HOPES that you can win this Judicial fight in the weak kneed Senate? Sorry. NEED to see some proof to validate your claims. Need to see a PAPER TRAIL.

'That's not OUR job' I can hear you all scream. By stabbing Bush in the back, YOU MADE it YOURS.

Here is the deal. Let's have a Contract for Justice. YOU big talking people who are all pissed about Miers go out and get 51 Senators to put in writing, their names on a contract with the Conservative Base. They, the Senators, promise they will: Vote for the "nuclear options" to get rid of this Judicial Filibuster nonsense and provide a list of names of Conservative Establishment Judges all of the 51 Senators on the Contract WILL vote to confirm.

You are all screaming "Trust us we can win" WHAT? You "Conservative" pundits haven't managed to deliver anything. Bush is out every day busting his hump while you all sit on your butts and whine about Bush. You watch a Senate repeatedly betray the Conservative base and SAY NOTHING. You all cannot even get action on Soc Security Reform! THE LARGEST single Govt entitlement is ON THE table and you all are too busy shooting at your own side to get ANY action. So put up or shut up "Conservative pundits". You all claim we should "trust us, we can win this fight".

Sorry SEE NO PAPER TRAIL to suggest we have ANY reason to trust your pronouncements. Put up time. Either GET something done or GET OFF OUR SIDE. See I am going to let you in on the dirty secret. YOU did NOT create US. WE, the little Red State peons, CREATED YOU. WE are the people who buy your books, watch your shows, go to your events, support your causes. YOU exist because WE want you too. However, since the days of Reagan you all have been a bunch of primping geeks whining about everything. 1st time in 50 YEARS we have ALL of it and you all spend your time bitching because life isn't perfect. So Hannity, Levin, Lowry, Buchannan, Kristol, Fund, Ingraham, Coulter, Malkin et al. Throw down. Let's see YOUR paper trail.

[wvobiwan]

EXCELLENT post Born! My sentiments exactly.

[SoCar]

Wow, I know exactly how you feel. Thanks for saying what needs to be said.

[You Dirty Rats]

I agree with other posters here that Bush is just too wimpy with our Republican majority that we voters fought hard to give him.

So you think it's BUSH'S FAULT that the Senate won't give his nominees an up-or-down vote? Talk about blaming the victim!!

I'd like the Bashers to explain exactly what the President is supposed to do to bring Senators like McCain and Snowe and Collins and Chafee and Voinovich and Hagel and DeWine and Specter and Warner into line. They'll all be around long after he's gone. They failed, not him.

[Hendrix]

"These pundits can't count to 50. That's the ONLY issue here. We don't have 50 Senators that will do WHATEVER IT TAKES to confirm the President's nominees."

WE don't need 50 senators that will do WHATEVER IT TAKES to confirm the president's nominees. I am not asking any senator to do WHATEVER IT TAKES to do anything. We have enough senators to get a good conservative through the senate. If we don't, then we need to expose them now and get them out of the senate. What Bush is doing is just exacerbating the situation and giving RINOs even more power.

[Hendrix]

"The President still has lower court nominees that can't get a vote. If the Senate won't act on those nominees, which really aren't important (compared to a SCOTUS nominee), what makes you think that a bomb-throwing radical (I mean that as a compliment) like Janice Rogers Borwn would get a vote for SCOTUS?"

The president cannot get lower court nominees through because they are lower court nominees and nobody really cares about them (i.e., the public does not even know about them). That would not be the case with a SC nominee. Bush should not nominate a bomb-throwing radical. We have a lot of non-bomb throwing candidates that he could nominate (more like Roberts).

[sinkspur]

And like some mad marriage counselor you advise the wife to shut-up, count her blessings and achieve perfection or else she will get more of what she deserves. Why, don't you know, the ladies at the Country Club are laughing at her what with all the talk about her leaving Hubby George and complaining about the abuse in public. Such things ought be kept quiet.

And any marriage counselor will tell you that every dysfunctional relationship has two sides to it. The hubby would say that his wife is expecting him to be a superman; to deal with a group of allies that often side with the opposition.

It is a myth that a president can jam anything down Congress' throat.

This whining about Education Reform and Campaign Finance Reform (which actually worked in Bush's favor) is the most overblown nonsense I've ever seen.

Your dogmatism in politics will guarantee that you will be always be disappointed. Politics is the art of the possible; this Harriett Miers nomination is indicative of that.

[quantim]

They'll all be around long after he's gone. They failed, not him.

You're really close.  It is actually the voters in each state that are the failures.  Your enemy is really the voter at the ballot box for re-electing these treasonous dems and RINO senators.  We get the government we deserve.

[Hendrix]

"Politics is the art of the possible; this Harriett Miers nomination is indicative of that."

I just don't buy that this is the only type of candidate that the Republicans can get through the senate. I also think that Bush wanted to throw a perk to a loyal friend and staff member, and that is one of the principal reasons that he picked her. There are other conservative candidates like Roberts that could have been pushed through the senate.

[quantim]

It is a myth that a president can jam anything down Congress' throat.

Perhaps, but you have to admit Reagan was good at the intimidation factor.  Few in the senate were willing to take him on because of his immense popularity.

[Jim_Curtis]

If the Democrats are laughing, it is nervous laughter. They don't want to see the Republican party grow a spine.

This fight in the Republican Party hurts Democrats badly because Democrats and their media usually get to define conservatism and here you have a fight that they are not involved in.

The moderates will watch and pick a side and they won't be siding with Democrats. It makes the President appear to be moderate and it makes the conservatives appear to be principled...the Democrats are way off to the left picking their noses.

The longer this drags on, the longer Democrats are non players on the battlefield, the worse it will hurt the Democrats.

[sinkspur]

Perhaps, but you have to admit Reagan was good at the intimidation factor. Few in the senate were willing to take him on because of his immense popularity.

Yeah. I guess that's why the Democrats snookered Reagan into raising taxes a year after he cut them.

They were actually afraid of Reagan.

[goodnesswins]

"We have enough senators to get a good conservative through the senate. If we don't, then we need to expose them now and get them out of the senate. What Bush is doing is just exacerbating the situation and giving RINOs even more power."

NO, Bush is doing what is needed to get a Conservative on the Supreme Court.....and then another one, and then, probably another one. Get over it. Most of the Republican's in the Senate are the WEENIES, and that's REALITY. And, the President has to do with what he has....he CANNOT get rid of them. They are ALREADY exposed.....sheesh.

[Tench_Coxe]

Exactly so. I have a wait and see attitude. The nomination and confirmation, IMHO, is a done deal. No sense in arguing too much about it. However--fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.
I suspect there will be some surpises in store for Republicans if Bush has screwed the pooch with a Souter. But that will not happen till 2006 at the earliest.

[Petronski]

So Hannity, Levin, Lowry, Buchannan, Kristol, Fund, Ingraham, Coulter, Malkin et al. Throw down. Let's see YOUR paper trail.

What kind of paper trail could possibly prove that Miers is a blank slate and a gamble?

[My2Cents]

I like the idea of a "Contract for Justice." I wonder how many GOP senators would actually sign it, though.

[bray]

Brilliant, put me on your ping list!! Not to mention Immigration when GWB put up a starting point they shot it down so fast he had to withdraw it. Now all you hear is how he (they killed it) won't address Immigration. You nailed the Meirs issue and the self appointed Conservative gods!!

Pray for W and Harriet Miers

[bray]

Roberts??!!! Who are you kidding. These same pubdits were blasting him until he smoked the hearings. Go read Coulters slam when he was nominated. You dare to bring up Roberts???

Pray for W and Harriet Miers

[mdefranc]

Gee, you should see if the Bush Adminsistration will pay you for posting this stuff.

[calex59]

I suspect there will be some surpises in store for Republicans if Bush has screwed the pooch with a Souter. But that will not happen till 2006 at the earliest.

The only surprise will be for the voters if Dems get control of the senate and congress again. We will be the ones to suffer. If you think the Dems will do better on appointments to the courts go ahead and vote third party.

[Texas Federalist]

Who the heck is this guy?