Originally posted by lmgnyc
Ed Prado is the smart choice instead of a hack like Gonzales... but Dobson would literally launch
nuclear missiles at the White House. He still might if Bush nominates someone who isn't clearly for overturning Roe vs. Wade.
Luckily for Bush, Dobson is completely irrelevant. A defection to the left by Christian Conservatives is every bit as unthinkable (if not more so)
than a defection to the write by gay african americans. The left has nothing to offer Dobson's followers as far as they are concerned- they have to
keep voting conservative no matter who Bush nominates.
If he picks a "moderate" (and who are we kidding? Gonzales is no moderate. Torture. Pro-business/anti-individual rights. And a serious
lack of ethics, especially when it comes to taking bribes from
Halliburton. Other than having a dubious position on Roe vs. Wade based on the one
parental notification case
By Bush's standards, he's a moderate. Corruption isn't necessarily extremist anyway, and of course he's corrupt. Let an honest senator be the
first man to vote against him and he gets a unanimous confirmation. He's sure as heck no John Ashcroft, and he hasn't publically stated that the New
Deal is incompatible with democracy and the US constitution, unlike Janice Brown.
He's not nearly as attackable as a "constitution in exile" judge, and his skin is brown, so it's less likely that the democrats will force the
Republicans into the nuclear option over him.
While I would enjoy watching some crazy-on--crazy action, I can't see Bush biting the hand that elected him. (snip)
and all the other American Taliban that are now running (over) the country.
I love religious and secular fanatics- they each think eachother is running the country. The only thing they can agree on is that Christan
Conservatives elected Bush, which I don't believe is true.
In my humble opinion, Bush was elected by the likes of Milosevich, Lewinsky, and Gore. Americans just wanted the White House to stay out of the news
and lower their taxes and gas prices. He was re-elected by John Kerry, who did a better job of rallying the nationalist base of the Republican party
than any Republican candidate short of the reanimated corpse of Patton himself could have ever done. Seriously- which are democrats more commonly
called: Sinners or Tulip-walkers?
Even if they had elected him though, they didn't vote FOR him, they voted AGAINST his opponents.
Brown or Owen fit the bill. Both are pro-life right-wing lunatics dead set on ensuring that every American will be living on a nuclear waste
dump and working 90 hours a week in a sweat-shop.
You ignored one other thing that those nominees promise: a fillibuster, followed by a nuclear option, possibly followed by a 6-3 defeat of the Nuclear
Option in the Supreme Court, ultimately followed by a Democrat controlled Senate in 2006 and a high probability of a Democrat controlled White House
You can paint Republicans as a bunch of fascist lunatics all day long, and I may or may not agree with you on every point, but they're not
politically inept (for the most part).
I strongly stand by my belief that we're looking at either Gonzalez or John G. Roberts.