Seriously, how many times have you done something like this?
He just needs some of this.
Posted on 10/09/2005 3:28:25 PM PDT by Pukin Dog
I decided to end my self-imposed exile from posting due to information that I received this past weekend from ‘a little birdie’ in Washington, which I subsequently had confirmed by another ‘insider’ if you can call him that.
You know I won’t tell, so don’t bother asking me for names, links, or further information. I trust these individuals, and have received accurate information from them before and shared it here on Free Republic. Of course, all are free to either accept or reject what I am about to share, but if you know anything about the Dog, I don’t change my mind often, and my only goal is to pass on information that can help support the Conservative agenda.
Issue 1.
Information was shared with me on Saturday, which described in no uncertain terms that Harriet Miers stands as the only nominee on Bush’s list which has any chance of confirmation by the Senate Judiciary Committee. The reasons for this are numerous, and would be embarrassing to the Conservative movement should one or many of the ‘stars’ who we hoped Bush would select be shot down in Committee, which again, if true, would be a certainty.
More than one of the persons we might have wanted made it clear to the President that they would not accept his nomination if selected. You can draw your own conclusions as to why, but the only hint I will provide is that data mining works too damn well these days. What we saw back when Clarence Thomas was nominated would seem like a walk in the park, compared to what would be done to some of our most popular jurists.
Our Democrat opponents have been quite busy, especially after John Roberts embarrassed them, searching for any information that would allow an open personal attack on a nominee. Sadly, many of the folks we wanted badly would have had their lives destroyed had they attempted confirmation to the bench, and wisely declined. There is no one among us who has not done (or had a family member do) things that we either regret, or would rather keep to ourselves. Because none of us are perfect, it is possible that had one of our choices been selected, we might have lived to regret that day for a very long time.
Issue 2.
Arlen Specter is in my opinion, a traitor to the Conservative movement. He has made it clear to the White House that he is determined to protect his legacy, by NOT supporting any name among those who might make it possible to overturn Rowe V. Wade. What that means, is that had Bush put up someone who might make us proud, Specter reneged on a PROMISE to support Bush’s judicial nominees in return for his, (and especially Rick Santorum’s) support for his re-election. This promise was made when there was strong consideration for removing Specter’s pending chairmanship in favor of John Coryn, or an extension to the term of Orrin Hatch.
The removal of Specter from the Chairmanship would have been disastrous, because he would have remained a committee member, and would have sided with Democrats against the President’s selections out of spite. So, why not simply remove Specter from the committee? That would have been really bad PR, considering Specter’s health issues at the time these decisions were being made.
One could argue that it might have been best to send up nominee after nominee, even if eventually defeated, but remember that O’Conner is only around hoping for a quick confirmation so that she can be with her ill husband. Bush was under the gun to come up with a confirmable candidate, or risk a Supreme Court not running at full strength as important rulings came under review.
I am told that Arlen Specter has gone back on every single promise he made when his chairmanship was still a question, and feels untouchable now that he is ill, because any punitive measures taken against him would be seen as ‘less than compassionate’ by the MSM and Democrats, who admittedly would have a field day, were Specter punished for his duplicity. The sad thing is that after “Scottish Law” or even the “Magic Bullet theory” that some think that anything that Arlen Specter says can be trusted. Sure, he supported Clarence Thomas, but does anyone believe that Specter would still be a Senator if he had not?
Issue 3.
Let’s face it; our Republican Senate is an embarrassment. From the weakness of Frist, to the petulance of the dude who ‘thinks he is leader’ McCain, down to his McCainiac compadre Lindsey (tinker-bell) Graham, to the nut from Mississippi who thinks he can actually get his leadership position back by actively rebelling against the President, we aint looking to good at all.
Our Republican Senate has as members at least 7 Democrats who could have never gotten elected as Democrats, who nonetheless support the Democrat agenda whenever they can get away with it, which unfortunately due to the weakness of Frist, is all too often. I find myself wishing Tom Delay would run for the Senate against Hutchinson, just so we can have someone in the Senate not afraid to break some heads to get things done. Why can’t we have a Republican Lyndon Johnson when we need one?
Because our Republican Senate is so weak, President Bush cannot rely on them for much. He could not have gotten majority support in this current Senate for any judicial nominee that would have made us proud. The usual suspects have made it clear to the President that any nominee who would have put their re-election prospects at risk would vote against that nominee. The bottom line, is that the Republican Senate is made up of too many who want the job, but not the work. The only job they see before them is that of getting re-elected to another six year term.
Luttig, McConnell, JRB, Owen, Alito, or anyone else you want to name, would have been defeated, and probably defeated in committee, in order to save other Senators from having to vote them down on the floor. Of this, I am now convinced. Only two names were considered allowable for Senate confirmation; Miers and Gonzales. When Bush met with Senators, he was reportedly told that these two names were the only ones that stood a chance to be confirmed, but Gonzales would face pointed questions about Abu Gharab, Gitmo, and the administration’s policy on torture. It would have been ugly, but he would have been confirmed against the added damage done by dejected a dejected conservative base, and liberal attacks on the President’s agenda. There would have also had to be a new search for an Attorney General, which would have been just as ugly.
Had Bush put up selections that would have been defeated, the chorus of ‘Lame Duck’ chanting coming out of Washington would have drowned out the President’s agenda. A defeat in the Senate would have also signaled to Congress that they were on their own, and no longer had to back up, support, or even listen to President Bush. They would have been free to play the political-calculation game that the Democrats have been playing for 6 years; avoiding tough votes that would be used against them in a future campaign.
So, what’s the bottom line?
The bottom line is that Bush did his best to give us what we want, in a way that will not hurt the prospects of the Conservative agenda. The primary thing that must be considered, is that the Congress can NEVER be put back in Democrat hands, for that would destroy all progress made up to now. Our day will come, but this aint it. If we had a Republican Senate made up of real patriots without the odd liberal in Republican clothing, things would be a lot better.
In Miers, Bush has clearly taken what he can get, and our best hope now is for another vacancy on the court before this administration’s term is up. The current makeup of the Congress will just not allow our agenda to be passed at this time without major sacrifices and pragmatic thinking to overcome the inherit weakness of having traitors in our midst.
It appears to me that Harriet Miers is the best CONFIRMABLE candidate for the Supreme Court at this time. This fact is not the fault of the President. Indeed it is OUR fault. It is us who have supported less than the best candidates for the Senate. We are responsible for Chaffee, Snowe, McCain, Graham, Lott, Frist and other persons of questionable courage. We should not be blaming Bush for our own votes. We selected the people that the President must rely upon to move his agenda forward. If they are losers, then he loses too.
Though they literally suck, we are stuck with these people because we must keep the majority to keep our agenda alive. There have been worse moments for us, but none would be worse than than the day we lose the Senate our House majorities. I now believe that although Bush disapointed many of us, that he did the very best he could do without destroying our momentum.
Yes, like Rush Limbaugh said, it was a choice made from weakness.
But the thing to remember, is that it was not Bush’s weakness, but our own, and that of the people we have elected to Congress that made this happen. Had they been strong, Bush could have selected anyone we wanted.
Because of what I now know about how and why Harriet Miers was selected, I withdraw my earlier statements against her, my statements suggesting anything less than my strong support of the President, and finally, my self imposed exile from Free Republic.
Pukin Dog is back, so deal with it.
Then, when called on it, suddenly you can't understand why everyone's attacking you personally.
Sorry, I'm not buying it. You constantly seek attention - and criticism comes with the territory.
I'm not giving up my party to them. On this site or anywhere else. You have been fighting them tooth and toenail, and you have help. Do not despair, lets wait and see what happens.
Looks like I struck a nerve.
I asked you NOT to post unsourced information; this is much too serious to be spreading unfounded rumors.
If you take offense at that, so be it.
He's worked all this time to put somebody on the court and now that he has the chance, he's going to wait a year -- not to mention give Sandra Day O'Conner the chance to vote on partial birth abortion?
I think not.
Only JimRob has the power to pull PD's plug, or censor him, and I don't see him doing it.
I for one, find it interesting.....and sadly believe the administration is fed up with all the backstabbing of the so called conservative pundits...
I hope it's not true....I hope it's not...
..but back off piling on PD.
You don't have to read his posts or threads...
..Some of us want to, however!
I actually saw one of them post something the other day like this: "So what if she votes to overturn Roe v. Wade; what then?"
I"m like, huh? I thought Roe v. Wade WAS the be all end all of the extreme right wing.
You'll have to forgive me; I was under the impression that we were interested in facts on FR -- from BOTH sides.
I find that part very hard to believe- though it may have been passed on to PD that way. It's beyond comprehension this president would let that spot sit...without a new nominee.
Yeah? And what does Karl Rove do for a living?
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.
Stop putting words in my mouth. I didn't say I supposed the GOP senators would vote to confirm. I said, putting up a conservative would put them on the spot, right where the RiNO's need to be.
As for the MSM poltroons, the less said the better, but whatever they do, I'm sure it will be small and nasty.
As for asking a nominee to stand up -- yeah, that's the process. And I don't believe that stuff about "all these conservatives say they won't go through the process". So who is supposing now? You saw Pukin Dog post it at the top of the thread, but did he get that from one of the "two Ediths", or Judges Alito or Luttig? No, he got it from a Bush political operative, is where he got it.
So Pukin Dog did NOT hear the words come out of Judge Luttig's mouth, did he? This is some political operative telling him that all these conservative judges are squirming like worms on a hook and hoping to God Bush doesn't nominate them.
You really believe that?
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.
Oh, please, that is so schoolyard -- pulling someone else's rank. "He's the President, and you're not -- nyah, nyah, nyah!"
Of course he's the President, but please don't make your Kool-Aid gargling into a virtue, okay? Kids are watching.
But seriously, your "challenge" isn't an argument, but a bandwagon appeal, and so while you're privileged to stand on whichever side of the question you like, the ad populum/bandwagon thing isn't really a valid argument for anyone's POV, and deployed in these circumstances it's a confession of weakness in argument on your part.
Perchance, is this "someone" a 6 ft rabbit who answers to the name Harvey?
Oh, okay; I won't post to you anymore; now everything you post is fact. Is that how that works?
..will he squander that vote?
...I personally believe Harriet Miers would have been a prolife entity for that bill...
..but we may never know, due to the whining of Kristol, Coulter, even Krauthammer (whom I once adored!)...and of course, let's not forget the dear full of themselves Republican RINO's who can't wait to wheel, deal and blackmail.
So if he pulls her........and not appoints anyone else, we get to hear them WHINE in the other direction.
Either way, it is not a win/win situation.
" You'll have to forgive me; I was under the impression that we were interested in facts on FR -- from BOTH sides."
Agreed...
"Facts" based on the wind at the moment, rumors, and "little birdies" can at best be considered nothing more than assumptions.
He just needs some of this.
Exactly. Which leads us to:
1. Bush was wrong, he didn't have the political capital. Or,
2. Bush was right, but then Specter and McCain conspired to undercut him and take it away. (Note to McCain: we all know you're mad at Bush for the last six years, now quit acting like an Italian cardinal. It's getting old.)
3. Bush was right, but he sees a fight coming that he wants to reserve all his political capital for. What on earth could it be?
Bet you that if that last case is the right one, that the fight will be over tax cuts, and/or systematic tax reform to a national sales or VAT tax, or something involving the only thing more precious to his Old Bonesmen audience than Supreme Court justiceships or even life itself:
MONEY.
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.