[goldstategop]

Yeah really. Miers had such a thin sheet that it was obvious she wasn't just up to the job. In contrast Bork was superbly qualified. The Democrats took his voluminous writings entirely out of context to portray him as a misogynist, a racist and anti-worker. The smear campaign worked. The reason Bork couldn't survive in 1987 was there was no conservative movement around then that could carry water for him. We have one today and there's no reason whatsoever for us conservatives to have to hide who we are. Let the liberals hide their beliefs.

("Denny Crane: Gun Control? For Communists. She's a liberal. Can't hunt.")

[dawn53]

The reason Bork couldn't survive in 1987 was there was no conservative movement around then that could carry water for him. We have one today and there's no reason whatsoever for us conservatives to have to hide who we are

We didn't even make the liberals show their beliefs on this one.

She should have been allowed to testify, then those "conservatives" you site, that are so strong, should have stepped up and voted against her, if she was truly what the National Review and others were saying about her.

Truth is the conservative in Congress aren't strong, as you'll soon see.

[Ben Ficklin]

How much water did you carry for Estrada?

[GarySpFc]

There used to be decency and integrity in the conservative movement, and we could hold our heads high, because we knew we always stood on principle. Now, some in the movement have sunk to the level of gutter Rats. God save America.

[RobbyS]

The point is that the dubious tactics were used against a candidate whose credentials were at least as strong as Thomas' or Rehnquist's and, of course, O'Connor's.

[EQAndyBuzz]

Bush won this round. He put up a Religious, Anti Abortion nominee who the Right slammed down.

Because the left didn't say anything, IMHO the Religion and Anti-Abortion knock is now of fthe table.

Putting up someone who is judicial now will force the RATS to bring up other issues.