WP: Conservative Revolt Intensifies

[Pirate Smile]

Conservative Revolt Intensifies
President's Men Get Brunt of Anger at Miers Nomination in Private Sessions

By Peter Baker and Dan Balz
Washington Post Staff Writers
Thursday, October 6, 2005; Page A01

The conservative uprising against President Bush escalated yesterday as Republican activists angry over his nomination of White House counsel Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court confronted the president's envoys during a pair of tense closed-door meetings.

A day after Bush publicly beseeched skeptical supporters to trust his judgment on Miers, a succession of prominent conservative leaders told his representatives that they did not. Over the course of several hours of sometimes testy exchanges, the dissenters complained that Miers was an unknown quantity with a thin r鳵m頡nd that her selection -- Bush called her "the best person I could find" -- was a betrayal of years of struggle to move the court to the right.

At one point in the first of the two off-the-record sessions, according to several people in the room, White House adviser Ed Gillespie suggested that some of the unease about Miers "has a whiff of sexism and a whiff of elitism." Irate participants erupted and demanded that he take it back. Gillespie later said he did not mean to accuse anyone in the room but "was talking more broadly" about criticism of Miers.

The tenor of the two meetings suggested that Bush has yet to rally his own party behind Miers and underscores that he risks the biggest rupture with the Republican base of his presidency. While conservatives at times have assailed some Bush policy decisions, rarely have they been so openly distrustful of the president himself.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/10/05/AR2005100502200.html

[nadinbrzezinski]

1. popcorn?

:popcorn:

[physioex]

4. Damnit Nadine.....

You beat me by 15sec...... ;)

[OKDem08]

5. Why, thank you,

I believe I shall. :popcorn:

[IndianaGreen]

6. Please, I'll have some

Nothing like watching the rightwing eat its own!

:popcorn:

This is probably the rare occasion in which all Democrats have to do is sit back and watch the circus clowns beat each other up!

[proud patriot]

19. Yum yes I'll have some

:popcorn:

[Gman]

30. thank you

:popcorn:

[CGrantt57]

63. Why, thank you, Nadine....

I'll take mine with a side of schadenfreude.

:evilgrin:

mikey

http://dictionary.reference.com/wordoftheday/archive/2000/05/10.html

[mcscajun]

76. Forget popcorn...buy corn futures.

It's gonna be a long, cold winter.

Need lots of hot popcorn. :)

:popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn:

[Halliburton]

2. but I thought

majoring in mathematics and being Bush's personal lawyer were intrinsic qualities of any Supreme Court nominee.

[Straight Shooter]

12. I thought it was the TANG cover-up and complicity in September 11

and of course participation in the construction of the *gag* Patriot Act. Let's not forget she thinks he's "brilliant."

(To paraphrase from Miss Congeniality):
She thinks he's brilliant
She wants to kiss him

[ninkasi]

22. That's downright scary...

Anybody who thinks Bush is "brilliant" is somebody I wouldn't allow to decide anything. It shows a serious error in judgment, if nothing else. She must be the ultimate sycophant. We already have an abundance of them running loose in the corridors of government.

[Cha]

33. Don't forget..Personal Cover-Up

Doctor, too. Dayum, like georgie will said.."..reducing the Supreme Court to a private plaything useful for fulfilling whims on behalf of friends."

"Otherwise the sound principle of substantial deference to a president's choice of judicial nominees will dissolve into a rationalization for senatorial abdication of the duty to hold presidents to some standards of seriousness that will prevent them from reducing the Supreme Court to a private plaything useful for fulfilling whims on behalf of friends."


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x2135697#2135710

[physioex]

3. Somebody Pass me the Popcorn, this Ought to Get Good..

:popcorn:

[Democrats_win]

7. Cheese goes better with Whine. WTF do they have to complain about?

Have they lost their houses?

Foreclosre?

Outsourced?

Lost a son in Iraq?

Sometimes I wish Limbaugh was right here, his face was on fire and I had a shovel to put him out.

[gratuitous]

20. Oh, don't use a shovel

Try a track shoe:



You know, I'm beginning to think that the Miers nomination just might get derailed.

[sendero]

51. Yes..

.... and I can think of several potential nominees that would be much worse. Would you rather have someone who might be reasonable or someone that is known to be unreasonable.

[gratuitous]

60. I'll take them as they come

And confirming someone to a position on the Supreme Court simply because the president might cast his net a bit wider to find someone even more objectionable is hardly a ringing endorsement. I'd prefer that the president, in consultation with actual lawyers and scholars, Senators and Representatives, found and nominated someone whose qualifications to be a Supreme Court Justice were more than merely holding a bar card.

If Bush can find someone even worse than Miers, and her nomination was rejected by the Senate, then it should be a simple matter to reject that nominee as well.

[sendero]

64. Well..

... I wish I lived in your world.

Let me tell ya, our hands are tied. We cannot stop confirmation of basically anyone the administration wants.

Do you really think they will hesitate to go nuclear option? I don't, not for a second. What's the downside for them, really?

As far as wishing the president would act like a president, well I gave up on that in 2003.

[gratuitous]

68. I don't think the Republicans will go nuclear

At least, not over Miers. Going nuclear would almost require a qualified nominee who enjoyed the unalloyed support of the entire party. I don't see that sort of support coalescing around the patently unqualified Miss Miers. And as adamant as the Republicans are in spouting their talking point that they govern by what's right, not what's popular, even the most doctrinaire among them are starting to pay attention to poll approval numbers in the 30s for a man who can't run again.

Sorry you don't live in my world; reality can be quite a pretty place, especially unconstrained by wild speculations and unsupported conjectures.

[sendero]

71. "You don't think"..

... Republican will go nuclear. Sounds like wild speculations and unsupported conjecture to me.

They will do whatever they want to. Who's gonna stop them, the Senate Dems?

[gratuitous]

72. I said "I don't think," then I gave reasons

I said "I don't think" the Republicans will go nuclear, and then I gave my reasons. See, when I said that if the Republicans go nuclear, it would be over a qualified candidate with strong support across the board. The "qualified candidate" and "strong support" assertions are called "reasons" for my opinion.

You merely said that should Miers be rejected, the next nominee "would be much worse." And that's all you said. See, that's called an unsupported conjecture. You didn't list any nominees who you thought might be worse than Miers, and you didn't say why they might be worse. That moves it into the realm of "wild speculation."

I ended my last post with a shorthand sentence, which I will apparently need to expand for you. I assumed for the sake of argument that your unsupported conjecture was true, and accepted the proposition that Miers had been rejected, and an even less qualified nominee (if such a creature could be found) had been put up by Mr. Bush. The precedent of Miers' rejection would provide the basis for rejecting the next nominee, as well. If Miers was rejected by the Senate as unqualified, then an even less qualified nominee would be similarly rejected.

My customary fee for teaching basic logic is $150, but I'll waive that in this instance.

[sendero]

73. Just as apt a conjecture..

... would be that if the Dem senate rejected Miers, they could nominate Atilla the Hun and if that nominee were rejected also, cry "obstructionist".

Really, it is all conjecture based on differing readings of what is going on. And as for "worse" nominees, there are are plenty and you know it, or should.

[abbeyco]

37. Maybe they need a fruit tray

to go with their cheese and whine?

Honestly, I'm thrilled to see these folks come out and go against her. And, I'm hoping, although it's not strong hope, that she's somehow derailed.

[bunny planet]

8. Maybe this Miers nomination is giving other conservatives an excuse to

remove themselves from the stink of failure that is a cloud around the blivet's head now. Maybe they are facing the fact that he is a tainted liability and they'd better get out while the gettings good. Endear themselves to their fundie bases and cut Jr. loose. They don't want people to find out that they already knew Bush was a liar and a crook and they stuck by him anyway. They want their constituents to think that they are outraged to find out that His Fraudulency never intended to be bothered about Roe v. Wade being overturned, not that they've been with him all the way for every crooked, evil, greedy, murderous, thing he's done so far.

[crispini]

56. Wow! Very good!

I would agree. Bush is becoming a political liability, and FAST.

[Inland]

61. I think it's the other way around

I think that the right wing christians and neocons were willing to stick with the president on all his policy failures, despite his hurting America and being in clear political trouble, in order to keep Bush afloat for purposes of supreme court nominations.

EG, I believe that the right wing christians know as well as the next guy that Iraq is a disaster. They just wont' SAY so, because Bush's continued political viability is needed for that supreme court nomination that will end abortion and stop gays.

But they have their doubts about Bush. They know a stealth candidate is intended to fool SOMEBODY. They suspect it's them.

The lack of support to the RWCs on this nomination is going to bring Bush down because he is going to lose his defenders re: all the failures.

[bunny planet]

69. I agree, but I just said it also gives them a perfect way to show their

disatisfaction with Jr. (real disatisfaction for the reasons you outlined, the Supreme nominee is their whole reason for sticking by him) and to pull away from him without revealing the hypocrisy of their support for him on all those other lies. Of course they're not really fooling anyone smart enough to have been paying attention but it gives them a supposedly righteous out for their followers.

[The Judged]

81. Not likely! They're just warming up.

[The Backlash Cometh]

9. "Take it back!" They're on the Titanic and they're fighting over the

lounge chairs.

Does this seem surreal to everybody else too?

[FourStarDemocrat]

43. Yes, & I think that the Dems shouldn't relax & take pleasure out of this

Miers is an unqualified cronie, but a one that will be the fifth vote to overturn Roe, and rule against the common rights of citizens for decades to come. We should filibuster Miers, and then when they nominate her replacement with a rightwing conservative with a long extremist resume, we should filibuster again and again..until they get the message that we cannot accept a SC Justice outside of the mainstream.

[The Backlash Cometh]

45. You're absolutely right. We compromise on this one and it means

we're not serious about defending the freedoms and beliefs of a group of people who believe in secular governance.

[Raster]

10. Dear conservatives, guess they screwed you too, eh? Deal with it.

Oh, and by the way, thanks for supporting these bastarts to this point. You didn't help, you know.

[Barrett808]

11. I keep wondering if this appointment is a defense against convictions

Imagine that Fitzgerald indicts and gets convictions that are appealed to the Supreme Court.

It would be very convenient to have a Harriet Miers on board in such an event.

[bemildred]

13. I was wondering if she was a stalking horse.

She gets torpedoed, next guy gets a greased rail into the job.

[TomInTib]

14. I'm with you bemildred

ever since the initial reaction by the right.
Rove&Co would never have thrown Harry in the ring without a lot of pulse-taking.
In my opinion this outrage on the right is no surprise.

[goclark]

21. Is Harry really Harriett ? LOL

[TomInTib]

24. High school nickname, NYT today.. ya shoulda seen the pic

[goclark]

35. Did she look like Twiggy at 95 years old?

Something about this lack of a resume person just doesn't fit with Bush to me.

I can't see him even liking her.

He seems to go for take charge woman and she looks like a grandma.

[RebelOne]

46. Well, a woman of 60 years is old enough to be a grandma.

And what exactly is wrong with looking like a grandma if you are old enough to be one?

[goclark]

74. Not a thing, I'm that age :)

[electropop]

29. Maybe it's fake outrage.

So our wimpy Senators will roll over, thinking she may not be too insane. Then SURPRISE she turns out to be a foaming Bork from Ork.

[cassiepriam]

44. Yep, that is a possibility, even if an untended one... nt

[Carolab]

25. That's just what I think too. It's all about HIM.

It always IS.

[Skittles]

36. no recusing (or what word am I thinking of) for bush whores?

talk about conflict of interest

[Jawja]

54. And convenient

to seal her records with "executive privilage" for the hearings - never to be unsealed because she sits on the court.

[msongs]

15. Dems trying to stop this nomination would be out of character

as they aren't much opposed to what bushco is doing anyway.

unless there is proof to the opposite view?

Msongs
www.msongs.com/clark2008.htm

[Sgent]

16. If I see another GD Dem eating popcorn

I'll scream.

We need to be out convincing the few rethugs that still support him (and aren't fundy's) that he's gone of the deepend and point out that his entire administration is about cronyism and appeasement.

We need to get them to call their senators, yelling and screaming.

Not just about this nominee (because someone like Owens would be worse), but if we can get him to pull her (or she is defeated), his term is over.

He will never get another candidate through w/o openly defying conservatives and getting the approval of the democrats. If we can splinter the R party, and get the 6 votes or so we need, we own SCOTUS.

[IndianaGreen]

17. Oh, c'mon, eat some popcorn!

Sure she should be voted down, but so should have been Roberts. Democrats should NEVER vote for whatever Bush wants.

Now, back to the popcorn...

:popcorn:

[Straight Shooter]

26. Scream away, baby.

Soothe your throat with a lozenge, then come sit by me and share some popcorn. :popcorn:

[shanti]

18. this is getting good

they are destroying themselves from the inside out.

move over, i'm joining you! :popcorn:

[kitty1]

23. I guess Bush's own ass comes before party loyalties n/t

[fishnfla]

27. Bush's lackies "got pummeled"

I am loving this

[Hardrada]

28. No, they knew if Bush nominated her

that there would be an outcry by the wingnuts so the Dems might feel more comfortable letting her get into office and when she is installed on the SC she will reveal her true nature as Queen of the Night!!

[Cha]

31. Yeah, I'll have some..

:popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn:

[DLnyc]

32. Sounds like Gillepsie tipped their hand a little.

Makes me think they were counting on Dems to attack Harriet and then they would cry 'sexism and elitism'. Of course, large numbers of Americans would end up identifying with Harry and getting fed up with Dems. After Harry goes down anyway, they hope to get smooth sailing on the next one.

How could they miscalculate and end up in a war with the conservatives?

1) Even evil bastards are sometimes incompetent.
2) Some slight distractions might be cramping their style a little
(Plamegate, Hammergate, Floodgate, Fristgate, JimBeamgate, Torturegate, MoreGatesThanYouCanCountgate. CorruptStealingLyingFuckingWarCriminalsgate, . . .)

[alcibiades_mystery]

34. These guys are almost always incompetent

Which is why the whole notion that conservative outrage is some sort of stealth campaign is so fucking stupid.

[DLnyc]

39. Yes, I agree, I think they are just screwing up bigtime here.

Certainly Iraq and Katrina are a testament to their ability to screw up on a monumental, gargantuan scale. Turning a trillion dollar surplus into a trillion dollar deficit (with nothing to show for it, really) is another testament to their incredible acumen in the massive f*ckup department.

But it seems like their political moves have usually been pretty well coordinated. Thanks largely to Rove. Who may be facing indictments for treason. Today.

Just my read on it . . . They piled so much bullion on their ship, it's springing leaks and about to sink like a rock! (I hope.)

[alcibiades_mystery]

77. Nobody's being indicted for treason

That's A.

Whatever anyone might be indicted for, it won't be treason. Rest assured of that.

[sendero]

53. At first..

... I thought it (the outrage) was the usual faxed talking point spin. Yesterday I heard an NPR report where they had interviews with several wingers.

This as no feigned outrage. They were saying things like "I guess all politicians are alike, they court your vote and then stab you in the back".

No, this is not a choreographed dance, not this time. His fundie base expected payback, and they don't feel like they got it. They are majorly pissed.

Isn't it lovely :)

[The_Casual_Observer]

38. What revolt? Those sons of bitches are arguing

about whether that spinster is ultra right or extreme right.

[Blasphemer]

42. That's the most ridiculous part of this nonsense

Few (on the right) have voiced concerns over her complete lack of qualifications.

[HuffleClaw]

40. *yawn*

i still say this 'outrage' is, for the most part, manufactured. its a sideshow worthy of p.t. barnum. her hearings will feature a poor 60 year old woman being SAVAGELY ATTACKEED ! ! ! the corporate media will play up the sympathy meme, the dems will roll over, we may even see some tears, she'll refuse to answer questions like roberts did, and the REAL issues about her (her long-time complicity with bush) as his pet 'fixer' will be swept under the rug.

[sendero]

55. That would only work..

... if it were the Dems doing the attacking.

As I've said, at first I agreed that this was all fixed. I don't any more.

The fundie base expected to take over the court, that is what they have been working on for 3 decades.

They fully expected Bush to nominate a known quantity anti-Roe judge and then to bust a filibuster if they had to to get him/her confirmed.

They are pissed because they don't know any more about Miers than we do. They remember Souter.

No, it's hard to believe but Bush has indeed pissed off his base (one of them, the fundies, the rich could care less).

[underpants]

65. I agree

I'm not buying this "revolt" business at all.

[radfringe]

41. Goldilocks syndrome?

Miers is toooo conservative, Miers is toooo liberal...

bush* blew it in trying to get it just riiiiight...

[stlsaxman]

47. Is that Dan Balz the same Dan "who tongues Bush's" Balz...

spouting how great this president is every Friday on Gwen Ifil's "Washington Whores On Parade"?

If even HE is turning, this admin is going down.

Pray for our great country. Pray real hard.

[stlsaxman]

48. Looks like "The Theatre" is filling up, the concession stand is hopping!

...and not a teary eye in the house!


:popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn:
:popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn:
:popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn:
:popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn:
:popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn:
:popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn:
:popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn:

[Hekate]

49. I just brought in a fresh tub to share, all buttered

:popcorn:

mmm, mmm good... What George Will said...

:popcorn:

Hekate

[Connie_Corleone]

50. There's nothing like popcorn in the morning before work.

Oh no! More popcorn smilies!!

:popcorn:

[JerseygirlCT]

52. Frankenstein's monster attacks its maker... nt

[Number9Dream]

57. Cartoon had H. Miers saying...

A cartoon in the NY Post 10/5/05 had H. Miers saying,
"No, ah'm not a judge, but I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night."

Cracked me up. Even the repuke Post is making fun of Miers' lack of qualifications.
(I tried to copy/paste the jpg, but no luck).

[tanyev]

58. I'm glad that leaders like Paul Weyrich and Grover Norquist

are so earnest about their responsibilities to the people who elected them. :sarcasm:

Seriously, although the spectacle of Republican in-fighting is a joy to behold, something is terribly wrong when Harriet Miers' confirmation hearing takes place in a meeting like this and the Senate confirmation is just a rubber stamp.

[meganmonkey]

59. Conservatives Intensely Revolting.

Fun with headlines!

:P

[geniph]

78. LOL!

You said it, they stink on ice!

[Overseas]

62. This conservative outrage just seems too staged.

Seems just like waving around the "guns, God & gays" excuse for the media to discuss while elections are being stolen. Let the so called liberal media discuss how "conservatives are outraged" by the choice, in order to soften the appointment of another imperial christian...

[bemildred]

66. That's because it is staged.

All productions in the MSM are staged.
The question is more why is it being staged.

One reason, of course, is to show that there is a big
powerful fundy-christian right that must be kowtowed to,
and that Ms Miers is somehow a dubious candidate from
their point of view, an idea that borders on psychosis.

[Arkana]

67. OK, that's it. All bets are off.

Hoax? No way. I believe it. Repubs are stubborn and will not admit they were wrong on ANYTHING. They wanted an Owen or a Rogers-Brown. What they got was someone they knew nothing about, and someone who had donations to Democrats in her past, even if she has "found Gawd" and thinks that Shrubya is the most brilliant man she's ever met.

[The Judged]

70. Projecting falseness & distracting detractors.

Mier's is a perfect theological choice.

However, all of the publicly percieved conservative criticism of Mier's permeates a false sense among the public that conservatives don't want Mier's on the SCOTUS AND THAT THEREFORE she must be what they want:

The anti-conservative choice.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

75. I am beginning to be convinced that this is no show, this is real

the fundies and ultra conservatives are pissed as hell at Boy George. Well, so is the rest of America, but for other reasons.

[KamaAina]

79. "KamaAina! The conservatives are revolting!"

"They certainly are..." :evilgrin:

[barbaraann]

80. Wouldn't "conservative revolt" be an oxymoron?

:shrug: