Thursday, October 13, 2005
The Miers Nomination Part 2: To Pull or Not to Pull, That is the Question
This morning on her radio show, Laura Ingraham said she believes that since the conservative pressure is mounting on President Bush to pull the Miers SCOTUS nomination, that he will, in her words, "do the right thing, pull her nomination and reenergize the conservative base." She said that's her "gut feeling".
I hope she's right, but, unfortunately, my gut tells me something different. My gut agrees with Robert Bork that while he should withdraw the nomination, he won't because he is "too stubborn."
She spent most of the morning polling callers as to whether or not Bush should yank the nomination. Predictably, most of the callers agreed that he should, while some came up with the interesting conspiracy theory that Bush floated this nominee as a ruse to energize the base, pull the nomination, then nominate the person he had wanted to all along, and that because the base is so riled up, the Democrats in the Senate won't dare fight it lest they face the fury of the base.
If there's a conspiracy theory I would like to buy into, it's that one. But, sad to say, I don't.
Of course, there were a few "we're standing by our man" kool-aid drinkers who oppose the withdrawal of Harriet Miers' nomination.
Again I don't believe he will yank this nomination, regrettably, unless he has serious doubts about her prospects for confirmation, which is, although by no means a slam dunk, probable, sorry to say.
I mean why would Bush pull this nomination? He's got some of the greatest minds out there making an irrefutable case for him. He's got Ed Gillespie and Ken Mehlman out there claiming a whiff of sexism and elitism among the conservative base. He's got Alberto Gonzalez saying Miss Miers is a friend of his. Best of all, we have Laura Bush telling Matt Lauer she's an extrordinary woman.
June Cleaver is an extraordinary woman too. Does that mean she's in line to become the next Supreme Court nominee when the next justice steps down?
Bush clearly misoverestimated the loyalty of the conservative base. How dare they choose loyalty to their core principles over loyalty to him?
I hope she's right, but, unfortunately, my gut tells me something different. My gut agrees with Robert Bork that while he should withdraw the nomination, he won't because he is "too stubborn."
She spent most of the morning polling callers as to whether or not Bush should yank the nomination. Predictably, most of the callers agreed that he should, while some came up with the interesting conspiracy theory that Bush floated this nominee as a ruse to energize the base, pull the nomination, then nominate the person he had wanted to all along, and that because the base is so riled up, the Democrats in the Senate won't dare fight it lest they face the fury of the base.
If there's a conspiracy theory I would like to buy into, it's that one. But, sad to say, I don't.
Of course, there were a few "we're standing by our man" kool-aid drinkers who oppose the withdrawal of Harriet Miers' nomination.
Again I don't believe he will yank this nomination, regrettably, unless he has serious doubts about her prospects for confirmation, which is, although by no means a slam dunk, probable, sorry to say.
I mean why would Bush pull this nomination? He's got some of the greatest minds out there making an irrefutable case for him. He's got Ed Gillespie and Ken Mehlman out there claiming a whiff of sexism and elitism among the conservative base. He's got Alberto Gonzalez saying Miss Miers is a friend of his. Best of all, we have Laura Bush telling Matt Lauer she's an extrordinary woman.
June Cleaver is an extraordinary woman too. Does that mean she's in line to become the next Supreme Court nominee when the next justice steps down?
Bush clearly misoverestimated the loyalty of the conservative base. How dare they choose loyalty to their core principles over loyalty to him?
