Monday, October 03, 2005

Harry, thanks for Harriet

I haven't been reading many liberal reflections on the Miers nomination. There aren't many out there yet, and it's fun to watch Republicans freak out for a change.

Democrats seem to be in a pretty strong position. As she's never been a judge and she's Bush's personal lawyer, we'll be able to attack on cronyism if we want. If we find evidence of a serious anti-choice streak, we can attack on ideological issues as well. But having the cronyism point in our pocket is pretty nice.

We should take a moment now to reflect on the skill of our Democratic Senators in getting us here. This is a judge who forces Dobson to roll the d20 to save against Souterization. Had we lost the filibuster fight or set up our defenses badly in the Roberts vote, Bush would've been able to pick some extreme candidate with clear right-wing views, and Republicans would be rejoicing. But we saved the filibuster and we used it to set an ambush that could possibly destroy any extreme right-wing nominee. I'm proud of Harry Reid, and you should be too.

I don't know how she'll rule on business-related issues. But whatever the answer is, she's 60 years old. Win election 2016, and you're in good shape.

1 comment:

Rousseau said...

So do we want Harriet to pass because she looks as un-convincingly conservative as possible, or do we want her stopped because we're pretty sure it can be done?

I remember the discussions regarding Gonzales apply a lot here. Someone who is only a Bush crony and not really conservative will probably not be crazy on a lot of federalist and originalist philosophies. They'll probably keep RvW on the books, and once Bush is no longer around to be a crony To, it's a good result. But on the same hand, they're more likely to vote for extensions of executive power, such as allowing the administration to torture. What matters more?