Replies

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.

I'll buy your analysis with but a few comments on the above.

Caveat....I don't like RINOS. Period. At least here in the liberal hell of Delaware, we KNOW where Biden stands.

But look where RINOS get elected! Pennsylvania, Maine, New Hampshire, Arizona. All places with a serious split in the compilation of the voters.

Anyone running in Pennsylvania that was anti-abortion would never get elected there. Period. Too many liberals in Philly, with the rest of the state Republican voters being basically Republican-Lite.

So the Republican party, in what can arguably be called questionable wisdom, choose to run as representative of the party a RINO. Only a RINO would win there.

One could argue with my assertion and indeed there's indications that the pendulum is swinging. But that pendulum swings slow and changes slower.

So we get the RINO's we can stomach. The rewards of having Republicans in the majority are many. The Chairs of all committees are Republican. This fact alone is worth its weight in gold. There's the factoid, however misleading, that there is, indeed, a Republican majority. Sure we have several RINOS but it's better to be the majority than the minority in any case.

Thus decisions are made and something is lost. We get Arlen Specter or maybe NOBODY. Maybe back to minority status. Maybe back to Democrats chairing all the committees. Remember how Daschle bottled up everything in committee?

As for it being OUR fault, ie the solid conservative voters, I say no. First, this administration has run scared witless from backing solid conservatives in RINO-like states. There was that guy from New Jersy. Another from California. One of them was named Simon, forgive my aging memory. Early indications that with a little backing from the administration these candidates might have had a chance.

It's not the CONSERVATIVE voters who won't back, or elect, these candidates in RINO states. It's the voters, a salad bowl of mostly socially liberal folk who want a Repub to mind the money. Lots of PA Democrats voted for Spector. Many of them would likely have refused a Santorum.

These RINOS do what they were elected to do. Which is to represent their voters. Spector is nowhere, nowhere, nowhere if he goes against abortion. The voters of PA simply will not elect a senator with that stance. It's not your solidly CONSERVATIVE voters who would refuse to vote for an anti-abortion candidate. It's the liberal voters, many registered Democrat, for God's sake, who would so refuse.

We live in a representative democracy and though I can't stand Pelosi, she was elected to represent the Mooonbats in San Francisco.

You either live within our political system or you don't.

If one does not think that these representatives should represent their voters than I guess one would also assert that Sunnis should represent Kurds and Shias shouldn't be represented at all. Or some other more appropriate analogy.

Basically I agree with the analysis of the poster and suppose that's EXACTLY how it all came down.

It's our political system. Like they say, it ain't perfect.

As for WE not supporting solid conservative candidates, I'd say not true. WE don't have enough votes in those RINO states to get them elected. What WE should be doing is....tada...educating our fellow voters.