I guess all of this is supposed to be the drawing of battle lines between…I wouldn't go quite this far. I think that conservative bloggers are fully entitled to express their opinions on the nomination and if you think it's a terrible mistake, fine, say so. But that can be done civilly with respect for people whom most of us admire and agree with the majority of the time. I haven't seen great incivility, but then I haven't read everything that people have written - it's been a busy week for me.
Between what, folks? Between the “elite” conservatives vs. the “bluecollar” conservatives? Between the “pure” conservatives on one side vs the “pure” conservatives on the other? I am appalled to see conservatives running headlong into this adolescent game of line-drawing, side-taking and base mockery. It is beneath us all. Everyone needs to stop it, cool their jets and recover their dignity and their senses.
This woman has not even had the opportunity to appear before the Judiciary committee so that we can all get a sense of her, before she is either confirmed or dumped. One month ago, everyone on the right was saying to the left that the President was entitled to his nominee. Suddenly, this is not true?
The president and this woman - who seems to be a completely honorable woman - deserve at bare minimum the respect due the Office of the President, and the respect due a professional woman who has served that Office well for 5 years. I am frankly amazed to see that so many on the right have forgotten what was supposed to be a basic tenant of conservatism: respectful debate rather than shrill jeering, name-calling and underarm farts.
Clearly, Ann Coulter’s hot-headed sorts of excesses are winning the day here, and taking the right down a path that looks very similar to the one trod by the left.
What does irritate me is those conservatives who basically want to take their marbles and go home since they're disappointed in Bush's nomination. Fine, stay home next election. I hope your sanctimonious conservative purity is warm comfort through the years of Hillary's presidency. Remember that our choice is rarely between the perfect candidate and some other person. Mostly, we have to deal with two imperfect candidates and figure out which one would be less bad for the country. If you're lucky, there might even be a candidate you can like. My experience is that such politicians are rare.
One of my favorite expressions is "Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good." Bush isn't perfect, but, for a conservative such as myself, he sure is a helluva lot better than his opponents in 2000 and 2004. Just envision the type of person that a President Kerry would have nominated after Rehnquist's passing. When you're done shuddering, suddenly Harriet Miers doesn't seem so terrible. Sure, she isn't perfect and there is a whole list of candidates you and I would have preferred in her place. But, she's the nominee now and we should give her a chance to make her case in her hearings. If she bombs then, we'll have more of a basis to jump all over the nomination. All this huffing and puffing and woulda, coulda, shoulda doesn't do anyone much good. So, let's hold off a few weeks and see what transpires.