harriet miers. family values

the Stupid Son *always* has this identical idiotic look on his face when he nominates someone. curiously, its the only time he looks as though he has ever accomplished anything - even if it is the patronising look that he has actually *given* something to one of his minions. It is almost a 'proud' look - but its the type of pride that a father might give when he throws his offspring the keys to an expensive car as a birthday present. if i had the time i'd produce a photo-essay, but i think u know what im talking about - he looked the same when he gave condi the keys to State, and Gonzales the AG keys, and probably when he tried to give kerik the keys to DHS.

* talkleft on Miers: "It seems more insidious to me than just cronyism: It may be stacking the Court to rule on all the Republican cases starting to work their way into the system. We already know that Republicans don't recuse from cases they are invested in; e.g., Bush v. Gore or the case over Cheney keeping secret his energy confab attendees and Scalia hunting with Cheney after review was granted, euphemistically called "Duck-Blind Justice"" (link)

* "It’s also worth discussing publicly that this nomination is a sign of Bush’s weakness. If he were strong, he would have appointed someone who would satisfy his base, and ram through the nomination. Instead, he’s appointed someone who seems to have satisfied nobody. Why? I’ll speculate about two reasons. One, he’s afraid that anyone with stated views, especially since this is for O’Connor’s swing seat, might be too vulnerable. Second, and more ominously for Bush, and for the country, he may be afraid of what’s coming down the pike in the Fitzgerald investigation of the Valerie Plame outing, and is more concerned with having a justice who will protect his sorry ass than one who will protect the constitution and be a good justice." (link)

* "When "US v Rove" comes before the court, you'll see what this really means - Bush is lawyering up the court, appointing two long time conservative hacks to the bench to block anything that might lead back to him." (link)

* the first thing i wrote this morning when i heard about miers' nomination was: "the good news is that Bush seems to have appointed her because he is scared that he'll have to rely on SCOTUS in the near future." (link)
after a frantic, frantic day, people seem to be coming around to the same conclusion. the not-so-incredible, but really-incredible thing is that Blinky has just tried to sell the entire country out for an entire generation just so that he can protect his butt for a few years on the possible chance that his case gets to the scotus, and that one vote will save his ass. Of all the amazing blogging that has gone on today about Miers - most of it has missed the *obvious* point. as best as i can tell, theres only one set of logic that fits the facts without uber-gymnastics. (altho i must add that ive been busy trying to impeach the president so i havent been mono-focussed on this issue)

* ezra has collected another round of the wingnut response to miers' nom. how many more of these are we gonna see before thnxgiving??? (link)

* kevin drum has another list of responses - this time aimed at President Blinky b/c of Miers. they obviously dont get it. (link)

* Ouch! WaPo's A1 headline: "Once More, Bush Turns To His Inner Circle" (link)
if anyone sees the paper in the morning. can you please confirm that is the actual headline? (the actual article is pure spin)

* more Miers: "Then there is the not so simple problem of recusing herself from speaking (or ruling if she were confirmed) about ANYTHING she might have been privy to as the White House lawyer for the last several years. Those who have been around the White House know, the counsel's office is involved in simply EVERYTHING." (link)

* what would happen if the repug wingnuts voted harriet down? i must admit - its difficult to try to see how this plays out. given the wingnut response today, its *almost* possible that they try. as i said during the Roberts nom - my ideal goal was to put *everything* on ice and hold up the nom until we kicked Bush out of office. frist said that he wants to bring a Meir vote by Thnxgiving - if we assume that is an aggressive timeframe, it might be the case that the vote doesnt happen till xmas - or even easter. with any luck, Bush will be on his way to wearing orange overalls by then. if thats the case, then i'd support a repug filibuster. OTOH, if Meirs is rejected by the repugs, then President Blinky's only choice would be to nominate some total wingnut freak - who would probably also fail. its difficult to know how this one plays out - or even a preferred strategery. there are a few probs for the dems - meirs might be supportable, but that support would be a partial endorsement of the cronyism that is the trademark of the egadminstration. if they dont support her, then she'll probably get blocked - if Blinky is still president and subsequently nominates a psycho wingnut, then we run the risk that that person will be on the court for decades, and perhaps the senate will go nuclear. thats a messy set of options. best i can suggest at the moment is that the dems use the hearings to tear apart the fact that Blinky nominates unqualified cronies, and also use the process to divide and conquer the redvoters. we dont need to decide how to vote at the moment, but we can probably do a lot of damage during the process.