Harriet Miers: Brillaince Wrapped in Mediocrity

A member who's name escapes me suggested that the Harriet Miers pick is accomplishing exactly what it was intended to accomplish: A sort of sponge for criticism to numb the Democrats arguments when a more conservative choice is subsequently selected. His points were brief, but they stirred an interest in me. In the next few paragraphs, I will attempt to disect and elaborate upon his comments.

Brilliance.
The nomination of Miers is cunning political strategy; a simple feint preceding a more decisive blow. Consider the implications if this proves to be true. The Bush Administartion can claim that it attempted to nominate a moderate justice that both sides of the aisle could embrace. Reid & Co. fall in to this trap and praise the nomination. Conservatives and even moderates then charge that the nomination is unqualified; whether she is unqualified or whether that perspective stems from Souter-fear is entirely irrelevant. Consequently moderate Democrats will, in a bid to strike a perceived crack in Conservative armor, join in denouncing the pick with the full hope that it will make Bush politically weaker (http://www.breitbart.com/news/2005/1...v32ynryo.html). I find the most interesting dynamic of this development to be the self-destructive confusion of the Democratic party. Those that support Meirs are made to look like fools by her glaring lack of credentials. Those that stand against her only jeopardize their party with shortsightedness. This shortsightedness, above all that the Dean-extreme-team can scream, will prove to be crippling.

The Strike.
Harriet Miers will fail to be confirmed and will slither back into the shadow from whence she came. Bush then nominates someone vastly more conservative who will have long-term implications for Republican dominance strategy: Janice Rogers Brown. The Democrats will lock arms to scream and howl, but because the screaming is split down the aisle, the Democrats will appear more shrill; they just got done howling with Republicans against Meirs! The resulting pre-orchestrated Republican spin will be 'Is nothing good enough for the Democrats?' Furthermore, Janice Rogers Brown will aid in shoring up the support of both blacks and females. With Bush showing a meager 2% approval rating amongst blacks, the JRB nomination will be crucial for what will come next. By standing against Brown, the Democrats will appear to be selling their soul in the centrist-right media of Fox news and related outlets. And the more left-leaning formats will be powerless to spin it otherwise because her gender and race are central to Democratic strategic appeal to minorities and women.

The Death Blow.
The power of the Janice Rogers Brown nomination comes at a crucial point. This administration still has three years left of governance, and it must generate some positive momentum out of the Iraq war and the recent disasters. I believe that it will attempt this with a multi-pronged approach consisting of foreign policy success, traditional base support, and a crucial play off Janice Rogers Brown. The fact is that we are winning the war in Iraq. The insurgency and rebellions have been an unsettling stew of various elements churning in a vat maintained by an environmental temperature of powerlessness. Consider the initial insurgency: The Sadr Mahdi militia, foreigners led by AQ in Iraq, and disenfranchised baathists. Sadr and his Shiites have joined the political process. The Sunnis will do so as well, given power and money; the process has already begun for them. In a recent news magazine article (Time or Newsweek, I read both and cannot attribute the article to either) a bold journalist obtained an interview with a purpoted suicide bomber facilitator, one who directs and caretakes for suicide bombers at the request of various entities. The insurgent leader is a Sunni and former Baathist who concedes that once the U.S. is expelles, the war will be against the foreign insurgents such as Zarqawi. With this underlying lack of consolidated unity in the insurgency comes the elusive but eventual American political victory. With time, the AQ presence will be expelled, and it is an Administration gamble that this will all occur within the next two and a half years, just in time for the next presidential campaign. The traditional grassroots support for the Republican party is a given; the GOP simply enjoys a larger base. But where does the swing vote come from?

Another Eight Years.
My wife said an interesting thing to me while we were driving the other day. She has never voted and she refuses to vote despite the fact that she agrees with everything I profess politically. She told me that she will vote when a women runs for President and only then. She is no feminist, but she is representative of the large untapped voter base that will pour out simply because of the sex of the candidate. Yes, the United States is ready for a female President, despite the nation's obvious ingrained perspective of traditional gender roles. It is an unfortunate paradox we face. My wife will vote simply based upon the sex of the candidate despite the damage that it may do to the country. Dick Morris, the former political advisor to Bill Clinton, recently fpublished a book on a topic perfect for this discussion: The only one who can stop Hillary Clinton is Condoleeza Rice. And Morris makes perfect sense. This author has seen what the Dems and GOP know is coming in 08. But the GOP will have the advantage: Condi is not married, so there shall be no embarrasing "First Husband"; Condi, obviously, is African American, which will strip many black votes from the Democrats as I suspect many will vote along racial lines just as my wife will vote along gender lines; third and finally, the presence of Janice Rogers Brown will have already prepared the nation psychologically for this transition.

And Another Supreme Court Nomination... or two?
The real victory is not in the 2008 Presidency. The Administration of George W. Bush has already proven the role once and for all to be that of figurehead. The real victory for Republicans in 2008 will be the retirement or passing of some very liberal Justices on the Supreme Court. Stevens is 85. Ginsburg is 72. Assuming that both of them continue their terms to the end of Condi's 8 years purely out of spite, then Stevens will be in his mid-late 90's and Ginsburg will be in her mid 80's. As much as Republicans despise Souter and Kennedy, neither is going anywhere for the next 15 years under a Republican Administration but by the grace of God. Regardless, the two will be rendered irrelevant and a new era of Conservative dominance will reign. After all, in the current era of self-established judicial review, the legislation only recommends law. It is now the Supreme Court, an unelected lifetime-appointed body, which solidifies these recommendations into generational permanance. Whether the new Republican Court can shift the nation away from this black hole of Aristocracy established by previous eras of Democratic dominance is another discussion altogether.

I think it's far more likely that Bush just !@#$%ed up.

That's one possible out come....

The other is that Bush, in a poorly thought out effort to please the democrats, Selected a weak conservative. Since he dosen't like to admit that he made a mistake, he will stick with Harriet Miers Despite her incompetence and we will suffer until she dies or retires. Ask yourself this: If a man who is incomptent in general(And i'm saying this as a conservative) does something stupid, is he using a clever feint or he is making another stupid mistake?

Thats the good thing about being a pessimist, Your right most of the time~:mecry:

Allow me to clarify. None of this is up to Bush. He is a puppet.

hmm, that does change things i guess. how ever, the conservative party in general seems to be moving left, and i doubt that Harriet Miers will be replaced Janice Rogers Brown, though i hope that will happen. like said before, assuming the worst is almost always the best assumption.

:hide: