Its too bad Bush didn't nominate Janice Rogers Brown to the SC, that would have been fun watching the democrybabies try to figure out how to attack that one.
__________________
Obamanfreude - 1. taking pleasure from the misfortunes of an Obama supporter as he or she is adversely affected by the policies of their Dear Leader.
Maybe my memory fails me, but I recall that Harriet Myers voluntarily withdrew her name for consideration. Granted, her withdrawl was in the face of various negative voices, but her nomination was not supressed by questionable parliamentary manoeuvres. Basically, the political cost to Bush of continuing her candidacy became unsupportable; Myers recognized this and withdrew. She would have been voted down in the Senate -- I personally don't believe that all US Senators are a rubber stamp for any whim of George W. Bush -- and it would be pretty embarrasing for GW to have his SC nominee disapproved by a Republican Senate majority. How Bush came up with Harriet Myers as his nomination for the SC is a mystery to me. I hypothesized at one time that this was merely theatre, to exhibit Alito in a much more positive light and therefore much more readily confirmable . . . but I grant that is pretty feeble and speculative. I'm unable to fathom GW's motive for nominating Myers.
There is simply no connection between the Myers nomination, her subsequent voluntary withdrawal, and the present threat of filibuster.
Blaming the dems for speaking their mind and threatening a fillibuster on Alito is silly. At least they are allowing the vote to occur, as the Constitution requires. They don't have the votes for a fillibuster regardless of posturing to the contrary. But if they did, how would that be worse than the actions and influence of those on the religious right that pressured Bush into giving up on his nominee Myers?
It sounds like you're arguing for a double standard for the dems here.
__________________
Jesus Christ--The reason for the season!
If you can read this, thank a teacher. If you can read this in English, thank a veteran.
If you're certain you know everything, there's little opportunity to learn anything.
I just thank God for the way it turned out... Meyers was probably good, no one knew her better than the President after all she was his personal lawyer for 5 years. Bush should get his nomination ,after all the Rep didn't belly ache when the worst of the worst was confirmed (Ginsberg). Now theres a genuine wacko for you.
As far as I concerned this was a great move on the presidents part.. The two newjustices that should serve at least 30 years plus. If were luck he may get one more... that would just make Kenny and Kerry kiss a pig.
By my count, we conservatives have about 30-40 more years of "PAYBACK" towards you libbies for morons like FDR, JFK, LBJ, Carter and that dismal excuse of a "man" Hillary Clinton!
Briman, either JRB or Emilio Garza would be the replacement up for either Ruth Ginsberg or John Paul Stevens. I think that President Bush would be under heavy pressure to nominate a Hispanic to the SCOTUS, and Garza is perfect for the slot--from the Fifth Circuit, and right along the ideology of Scalia and Thomas . . .
[Deleted]
