[thoughtomator]

The basic compromise that was made as a matter of politics was for conservatives to accept the socialistic tendencies of George W. Bush in exchange for the moderates' cooperation in the reversal of many decades of judicial tyranny - the prime motivator for conservative voters. This nomination appears to be a breach of that basic agreement, not by the conservatives, but by the moderate politician in whose charge this agreement was kept.

I know you have both been here long enough to remember the innumerable times that this appeal was made to persuade conservatives to support Bush in 2000. The offer was accepted, and followed through... until now. This was a key opportunity, at the very core of the conservatives' interests, and it appears to have been carelessly squandered. I realize that there is a small but nonzero chance she may actually turn out like Thomas. Given the historical percentages, there's less than a quarter chance this will happen.

But make no mistake. It was the President's act that precipitated the fallout. This is do-or-die for the conservative voter not persuaded by the President's considerable personal charm. Conservatives are simply expressing the natural reaction to a knife in the back, at the hand of a trusted friend. Y usted, George?

[HitmanLV]

Part of the breakdown on the part of some conservatives regarding the Meirs nomination is that they appear to now want a conservative activist judge.

Since much of our side's argument when it comes to the court is that we don't want liberal activist judges, the current desire for 'our' activist judges makes us all look pretty bad.