March 4, 2005
MISTAKING A STRAIGHT LINE FOR A TRIANGLE (via Daniel Merriman):
Bush has made spent fuel of Frist's 'nuclear option' (Dick Morris, The Hill)
President Bush and Karl Rove probably figured that they did not want the power to appoint judges without opposition from the Senate Democrats. They realized that without the filibuster there was nothing to stop them from nominating judges who would cling to a hard right-wing agenda on Roe v. Wade and other issues, permanently alienating much of the country and driving a stake into GOP efforts to reach out to independents and women.Bush needs the filibuster so that he can nominate judges who will not drive a wedge into the politics of America. He needs an excuse to tell his far-right friends why he is not naming a new Clarence Thomas or William Rehnquist or Antonin Scalia to the court. Bush grasps that such an appointment would be a step that would shatter the unity he is achieving after his reelection. And he needs the filibuster to keep the loyalty of his base even as he disappoints their most earnest expectations.
Bush might submit a nominee who would trigger a filibuster when the Supreme Court vacancy comes. He might then be forced to name a more moderate alternative. Or he might circumvent the process entirely and name a nominee acceptable to all, as Bill Clinton did. But, in any case, Bush needs the filibuster. That’s why it is still on the rulebooks.
Mr. Morris thinks that just because Bush and Rove are as masterful politically as he they share his lack of principle. But recall that folks like Mr. Morris said that John Ashcrooft too was a bone thrown to the religious, a canard put paid to by the Wead tapes. Posted by Orrin Judd at March 4, 2005 11:15 AM
Morris is best when he channels the thinking of Hillary, since both of them share the same belief in the ability to manipulate the American public. That assures Dick of considerable TV time at least through November 2008, but applying the same standard to the WYSWYG guy in the White House is more problimatic.
Posted by: John at March 4, 2005 11:21 AM". . .[S]hatter the unity he needs AFTER his election." (emphasis added) What the HELL is he talking about?
Posted by: Lou Gots at March 4, 2005 12:30 PMBut it's not possible to believe in Rove the evil genius puppet master without concluding that the Wead tapes are an obvious plant.
Posted by: David Cohen at March 4, 2005 12:43 PMi read morris because of the tittle tattle he sometimes spreads around, but on serious issues he is *always* wrong.
Posted by: cjm at March 4, 2005 12:46 PMI love it when they continually assure us that Bush is really just a Clinton Democrat in disguise.
Posted by: fred at March 4, 2005 1:08 PMI only have one question for Dick Morris. If his take on Bush's motives is true, then why did Bush renominate the judges who were blocked in the previous session?
Posted by: jd watson at March 4, 2005 1:47 PMMorris is a reliable contra-indicator.
Posted by: Gideon at March 4, 2005 5:18 PMLet us wait to see whom he does appoint before passing judgment. He could easily wimp out like his father and appoint a non-entity like Souter.
Posted by: Bart at March 4, 2005 6:03 PM-- read morris because of the tittle tattle he sometimes spreads around, but on serious issues he is *always* wrong.--
He predicted that Evita will never be president.
I hope he' right on that one.
Souter may well be the most disasterously wrong-headed appointment in US history and, yes, I'm counting Brennan and Douglas.
Posted by: David Cohen at March 4, 2005 7:44 PMHe needs an excuse to tell his far-right friends why he is not naming a new Clarence Thomas or William Rehnquist or Antonin Scalia to the court.
Boy, Morris is NOT paying attention, is he?
Posted by: Matt Murphy at March 4, 2005 8:14 PMWhat Dick says makes eminent sense. We have to acknowledge the reality that Bush is driven by economic conservatism and not by social conservatism. However, it is social conservatives who have passion and get people to the polls. Unfortunately our social conservative brethren like you, just cannot come to terms with this reality.
Heck, Bush appointed Ken Mehlman, a quite public gay man to head up the Republican party - just after winning an election where homophobes gave him the winning edge. How much more proof do you need?
Posted by: J Rocco at March 4, 2005 9:49 PMWhat Dick says makes eminent sense. We have to acknowledge the reality that Bush is driven by economic conservatism and not by social conservatism. However, it is social conservatives who have passion and get people to the polls. Unfortunately our social conservative brethren like you, just cannot come to terms with this reality.
Heck, Bush appointed Ken Mehlman, a quite public gay man to head up the Republican party - just after winning an election where homophobes gave him the winning edge. How much more proof do you need?
Posted by: J Rocco at March 4, 2005 9:50 PMOur grandfather was offered Brennan's seat.
Posted by: oj at March 4, 2005 11:42 PM