Monday, October 31, 2005

The New Supreme Court Pick

I will reserve comment on this guy's judicial record for a later post, but i'll tell you exactly what this nomination of Samuel Alito is about: appeasing the religious right with a political diversion. This wouldn't have been done, i don't think, if Karl Rove was indicted Friday. it is utterly a Rove move to take on a heated fight in order to galvanize the base and when you can control the fight. Rove knows he can do this with the democrats if he has his base together, and this isn't about getting 100% of the vote. its about getting a winning margin.

This also stands on another Bush (Rove) tenent: if you get some really bad press, take a remarkably tough stand on another attention gathering issue. Think how long it took to come up with the other 2 nominees, even when one cam unexpectedly. now look at the speed here. this has EVERYTHING to do with healing the riff between Bush and the right AND with getting the topic off treason in the white house. I think this is a much more dangerous gamble than it usually is/would be now because I believe only Karl Rove could manage this sort of fight and if he's out of the picture, this train could shoot off the rails quite easily. Another factor is the Press. Finally grumbling awake after 5 years, they are less likely to let the Plame matter slide off the plate. ALSO it is worth mentioning that bush, after the Miers nomination, likely felt he'd done enough to make an attempt at placing a Woman on the Court. it didn't work, thus he's free to do as he sees fit in order to get a decent nominee. the subtext is present if not certain.

My accessment: I'd rather have Miers.

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

in the end Miers would have voted against the pro women's rights/ pro-human rights groups anyway...and Lacey used to say "Just dumb". I think this "diversion" is exactly what the democrats need to point out next go around what we meant in 04 when we said "it's the supreme court stupid"....it was VERY VERY hard to explain this to people (at least where I was in South Carolina)...once they see some real damage...they will think twice.

Polly said...

the problem is that 'real damage' takes a generation to 'fix'. literally. another issue, for me, is that i felt Miers legal rationale would not be as air tight as others, thus easier to fix after the fact. a brilliant guy on the other side sews up all the loopholes.