[counterpunch]

He does. It will cost him $50,000 to break the confidentiality agreement he signed.

Not if he's subpoenaed to testify before the Judiciary Committee. You are quite stupid. You keep insisting that Bush can hide behind Executive Privilege and confidentiality agreements. Nixon made that gamble too, and he lost. If Bush loses public opinion, as he has been, then he has nothing. If the public doesn't buy the legalistic dodging, then he's up against the wall.

Do you really think Harriet Miers is worth Bush gambling his legacy and his relationship with the public and his own party over?

[You Dirty Rats]

You are quite stupid.

Strong words coming from one who is using a Bush National Guard Service attack piece to attack this nomination -- not to mention a violation of posting guidelines. But hey, if you are determined to become Meow Mix, don't let me stop you!

[sinkspur]

Stuck on stupid.

[sarasmom]

"Do you really think Harriet Miers is worth Bush gambling his legacy and his relationship with the public and his own party over?"

I know the above was not directed to me, but I had to respond to that question.LOL!
There are some "players" you just don't gamble "against", if you have any rational thought processes regarding the "game".
I can and will continue to battle President Bush on several of his,IMHO, wrongheaded pet domestic issues, which he can't put through without the elected legislature.
He is POTUS and all SCOTUS nominations are where he plays his executive level cards as the dealer.
I voted for him to play them well.
Thanks for reminding me of the importance of his gambling expertise!
I will continue to watch the rest of the hand he has dealt with interest.