It was obvious listening to Reid yesterday that this is a fight that Senate Democrats were not eager to fight. But if the gauntlet has been thrown, fight we must, with all our strength.

Limbaugh and his Ditto Army will be so excited that they'll need towels this afternoon, but there must be extraordinarily heavy hearts among Moderate Republicans everywhere today. This is an attempt by Rove to erase them altogether.

In New Jersey, this should guarantee Corzine's election to the Governor's seat. How will it affect the Virginia Governor's race?

A new grand jury can indict very quickly, as we saw in the Delay case. I think the White House is making a huge mistake depending on Rove so heavily when he is almost certain to be indicted. Reading between the lines of last week's stories, what happened is that Rove threw a few last minute curves at Fitzgerald---such as the idiocy about his flunky not knowing about the call to Cooper (duh---why would he tell his flunky he is committing a crime?). Fitzgerald is probably finished debunking Rove's latest BS and will indict in short order.

steve, the right has been looking for a reason to sing kumbaya together basically since katrina.

now they have one.

and while the machine may be creaky and damaged, they can still shove through a scumbag onto the supreme court, no matter how well organized the opposition.

Scalito will be voted in along party lines after major tantrums, and we will still be ruled from on high by War Criminals. In this SC fight we must show who the Right really is, tear off their stealth mask, but NOT put on the back burner our country's deception into an unnecessary, illegal, and immoral war. Battle rages on many fronts, but we must control where the public focus will be, and I say it should be upon the War Criminals since we will never have a better opportunity than we have at present.

Reid looks like he isn't about to go all wobbly....

and I would suggest that if Lieberman knows what is good for him, he will grow a spine as well.

Bush has decided that he doesn't care about Uniting the Country,,,his choice of Alito is attempt to appease his base.

It's time for Democrats and all Americans who have been FED Up by this Corrupt and Divisive Regime to held account.

It's time to FIGHT,,,it's Time to Filibuster and let the chips fall where they may.

If Democrats walk away from this Fight,,they don't deserve to be in power. Bush has put a line in the sand. Lets take it to them with Both barrels.

Bush has decided that he doesn't care about Uniting the Country,,,his choice of Alito is attempt to appease his base.

It's time for Democrats and all Americans who have been FED Up by this Corrupt and Divisive Regime to held account.

It's time to FIGHT,,,it's Time to Filibuster and let the chips fall where they may.

If Democrats walk away from this Fight,,they don't deserve to be in power. Bush has put a line in the sand. Lets take it to them with Both barrels.

"Monarchial" is too flattering a term for Busholini. Try tyranical.

My problem with Miers was not that she is a conservative, but rather the fact that there is, with good reason, no legal precedence for a sitting president to appoint his own attorney to the SC, or for a sitting president to appoint a current WH Counsel because an attorney has a continuing duty to their client, hence it would not be possible for Miers to have remained independant in issues involving this president or for that matter the executive branch.

Now that this is no longer a problem, the challenge will be to figure out a strategy that can prevent the current occupier of the Oval Office from appointing anyone to the SC until Fitzgerald is done. I say that because Fitzgerald met with Busholini's private attorney Jim Sharpe last Friday. I'd rather not have a criminal appointing the judges.

Whether the Dems can be effective in challenging nominees is dubious. I'd prefer them to filibuster or walkout rather than particpate in a sham.

Timing. Here we have it, today's topic of deflection and division. With each passing moral transgression of this administration, we are handed a new travesty about which to argue.

Ohio. Anyone know how the "anomalies" were explained or resolved in the vote counts in so many Ohio districts???

Abu Ghraib should have done it. Anyone seen the promised "missing" two thousand pages of the Taguba report?

Sanchez??? Anyone seen an explanation about why he was never taken to task for LYING TO CONGRESS about our TORTURE policies in Iraq?

Gannon??? Anyone seen a viable explanation about what a gay whore and pornographer was doing roaming the halls of OUR White House and being privy to state's secrets???

Armstrong??? If in fact it is ILLEGAL for the White House to advance such bought and paid for PROPAGANDA, as has recently been ruled, WHY ISN'T SOMEONE BEING INDICTED FOR THE PRACTICE?

Gonzales??? The slimy perjurying puke BLATANTLY AND BRAZENLY LIES about his role in Bush's recusal from jury duty during his confirmation hearings. WHY WAS AN APPARENT FELONY PERJURER ALLOWED TO FILL THE HIGHEST LEGAL POSITION IN THE LAND???

IRAQ. Bremer, sent to STEAL the Iraqi assets. When the plot is discovered, Sistani, a Shiite Iranian, is able to assume power, and hold the ax of civil war over our efforts to "democratize" (Translation; "raze and loot") Iraq. The result??? An inevitable Shiite Theocracy closely aligned with Iran. Bremer's reward for the biggest most costly clusterfuck in the history of the United State?? The Presidential Medal of Freedom.

The Downing Street Memo??? Irrefutable PROOF of a conspiracy to LIE our nation into WAR. Impeachments??? Indictments??? Massive press coverage??? Universal public outrage???

Bolton....Katrina....Delay....Frist.....AD FUCKING NAUSEUM.

And now this. Today's distraction.

Whats next, Chicago glowing in the dark because some maniac strolled over our wide open borders with a suitcase nuke??? Smallpox with no vacines, or worse, vaccines that are worse than the disease?? An invasion of Syria to hide the failure of the invasion of Iraq??

Red alert. This ain't America as I was raised to believe. This is Bushworld. Welcome to hell.

bush took richard viguerie's advice, offered prior to miers' withdrawal...

"President Bush desperately needed to have an ideological fight with the left to redefine himself and reenergize his political base, which is in shock and dismay over his big-government policies."

http://www.takeitpersonally.blogspot.com/

http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/editorials/articles/2005/10/28/after_miers/

Steve writes

Libby did not do his work alone. There are many other culprits who helped him, but it would be quite wrong to think that Patrick Fitzgerald alone can bring all to justice. It's too big a problem when the President and Vice President cultivated a "culture" where Libby's type of alleged skull-duggery was encouraged.

and

For some time, I have been arguing with moderate Republicans and progressives and liberals that the only way to knock back the White House from its outrageous behavior was to (1) embarrass those in power with the spotlight of media attention on their most irresponsible and wrong-headed decisions and (2) to sue them in courts.

For five years, the American public and the whole world have been passengers on a ghost train: a killing machine run by a cabal of lunatics who thought of themselves as Masters of the Universeâ„¢.

With Libby's indictment, Fitzgerald has stepped on the emergency breaks. And while I agree with Steve that

this is all about taking back the blank check and
unconstrained power that the American public gave this White House because of the war

it is far from clear in what way or -- even when -- this death train is actually going to come to a halt.

Are they going to 'implode'? Are they going to go down in flames, trying to drag everyone along and inflict maximum damage to the country while pandering to their Taliban base, as evidenced by today's nomination?

Or is this killing machine going to come to a halt in a controlled fashion, despite all evidence to the contrary? Will the biggest destructive charges planted underneath the Constitution of this country be defused or are we standing on the precipice of the most damaging chapter yet of this ongoing disaster?

"If Bush has his way, we would now have five Catholic males on the high court. When exactly did the Vatican take over the United States legal system?"

-Steve Soto, at the Left Coaster

btree's "death train"

"Locomotive Breath"

In the shuffling madness
Of the locomotive breath,
Runs the all-time loser,
Headlong to his death.
He feels the piston scraping --
Steam breaking on his brow --
Old Charlie stole the handle and
The train won't stop going --
No way to slow down.
He sees his children jumping off
At the stations -- one by one.
His woman and his best friend --
In bed and having fun.
He's crawling down the corridor
On his hands and knees --
Old Charlie stole the handle and
The train won't stop going --
No way to slow down.
He hears the silence howling --
Catches angels as they fall.
And the all-time winner
Has got him by the balls.
He picks up Gideon's Bible --
Open at page one --
God stole the handle and
The train won't stop going --
No way to slow down.

Maybe try winning an election, it seems that a minority of radical left wing liberals think they are correct and any one that disagrees with them are far right wingers outside the mainstream. Wake up now, we are the mainstream, maybe the left should actually try coming up with thier own agenda instead of just conspiracy theories and criminalizing politics.

Democratic Agenda:
1. Kill babies
2. Raise Taxes
3. Make the federal government bigger and more intrusive.
4. Blame all the problems of the world on America and apologize for them
5. Submit Federal government to a bigger world government. I.E. The UN
6. Take away guns
7. Ban God

Hmmm, no wonder the dems can't win an election anymore.

Samuel Alito believes in a limited role for courts only so long as he agrees with the legislation he is viewing. If it is the Family and Medical Leave Act, he thinks the Congress lacks the constitutional authority to enact it.

Make no mistake. This is a VERY activist judge.

Hi Steve,

You're right on when you suggest that this move was a swift attempt at distraction from last Friday's indictment, and I only worry that it could be successful. By choosing an extremist candidate, Bush has successfully energized his right wing base and also will be sure to set off a storm of charged partisan debating over what's sure to be an almost ridiculously polarizing nominee. This debate will consume news headlines and the blogosphere for weeks, and reignite the conservative-vs.-liberal divisiveness he's so successfully fueled during his presidency.

I find the most fascinating (and despicable) thing about Bush's recent actions to be his mournful praise for Libby's service and patriotism after the indictment on Friday. Rather than condemning a senior staffer for leaking information to the press and promising this won't happen again in his White House, he slathers the man with praise and laments his departure. Unbelievable. It is solid evidence of this man's complete refusal to place objective service to his nation before preferential treatement for his cronies.

MikeW,

You forgot one.

8.) Execute all Rightwingnut trolls.

Louise,
You are right

8. Eliminate everyone who doesn't share the liberal agenda. Over 50% of the voting public by my count.

Thanks Louise

mikeW===

Republican Agenda

1. Create Massive Debt
2. Lie about a Phony War
3. Out a CIA Agent==risking our National Security
4. Give Oil Companies Huge Tax cuts and Pork
5. Attack the Middle Class of America
6. 2000 Dead US Soldiers
7. 7,000 Wounded and Maimed
8. Divide America with Nominations of Radical Right wing Judges
9. Let hundreds die from a Hurricaine while not responding for 5 days.
10. Have Delay,,Frist,,Libby,,Rove,,Abramoff, Cheney as Role Models while they are indicted or investigated for illegal acts.
11. Don't Secure our Borders and allowing our country to be drained by millions of "illegals" pour across our borders putting a strain on our Healthcare,,Economic,,,JOB,,,Security industries

Mike,,,When are Republicans gonna care more about their Country then their Party?

Mike W,
If you knew how stupid Bush thinks you are, you would be embarrassed. Unfortunately, you are too stupid to understand how deeply Bush disregards you.

Bill,
Seems like some of your agenda items are shared between both political parties.

1. Create massive debt-big government spending of other peoples money has been a long term democratic goal, seems like the Republicans have joined the party. I would help push a balanced budget amendment.
2. Lie about a phony war-Lies going back easily to 1998, started by high standing dems like kennedy, clinton, hillary, kerry as well as others. Lets not forget UN and International lies as well. Yet when the Republicans went to war over these earlier lies they got the credit for starting them.
3. Out a CIA Agent-Seems like she was "outed" long ago and hasn't been undercover for around a decade.
4. Huge tax cuts and pork?
5. Attack the middle class- Nice to try and pass on that credit but the truth is the middle class has been under attack since the democrat amended the constitution, remember the 16th amendment.
6. 2000 Dead Soldiers- Heroes every one of them, thanks to all for protecting our freedom, that includes the ones who died in Viet Nam, Korea WW1 and WW2, as well as the other conflicts our country has been involved in.
7. 7000 Wounded and maimed- See Number six above, but substitute wounded for the word died.
8. Radical Right Wing Judges- Who interpret the constitution rather than redefining it to thier agenda. Unlike Darth Vader Ginsburg
9. Let hundreds die from a hurricane- Seems like an extremely partisan statement being the mayor, governor, and senators were all democrats, so the feds get the blame due to the elephant symbol?
10.Have Delay,,Frist,,Libby,,Rove,,Abramoff, Cheney as Role Models while they are indicted or investigated for illegal acts- Role models in Washington, come on. Brings up thoughts of Clinton's escapades, Kennedy's swim, Byrds Ku Klux Klan days. Anyone looking to Washington for role models is in sad shape.
11. Don't Secure our Borders- I couldn't agree more, all politicians of both parties seem to put the hispanic vote over our safety and security. Makes me think third party.

Funny how you question my love for my country, believe me the Republican party does not even come second to my love for my country. But nice try.

marky,
Once again when discussing issues I see you have to resort to calling me stupid.

Personally, I would have to assume anyone that thinks any Washington politician cares about them irregardless of party is probably stupid. I believe all politicians prey on the ignorance of thier constituents and yes that includes both the right and the left.

...and Clinton loved you and thought you were the greatest?

First it was John Roberts and now it's Sam Alito. I am so out of the woods on this one. It really doesn't matter what Fitzgerald the traitor does, I'm off scot free! Yeah, rank has it's privilege and I rank about top of the old political food chain around here. So for all of you libs out there thinking that I was going to have to pay the piper, you can kiss my virgin white butt. I think that it's time for a vacation at the taxpayers expense. Wah...hoo! Cancun here I come.

When you mntioned Mrs. Parks, Steve, a deeper question cam to my mind: how would Alito see Plessy v. Ferguson? To me, that's a great example of judicial activism!

But, what do I know?

Steve is right again about Karl being back in Bush's saddle. This reeks of Rove. I gave Roberts a pass because even David Boies said he was brilliant. Whatcha gonna do with that? Besides, he was replacing Rehnnie. But Alito? Fughettaboutit. I've posted my gut feelings on my blog. A lot of women, I bet, feel the same way I do.

Taylor Marsh

MikeW, there is nothing in your contemptible and moronic listing of "democratic" issues to merit the term "discussion." you're simply yet another of the little propaganda robots that the right-wing seems to graduate from good ol' Disinformation U.

To even "discuss" your list would be to sully oneself in mammoth dishonesty and fantastic projection.

marky, in fact, was rather generous to you....

"marky,
Once again when discussing issues I see you have to resort to calling me stupid."

Personally, I would have to assume anyone that thinks any Washington politician cares about them "irregardless of party is probably stupid. I believe all politicians prey on the ignorance of thier constituents and yes that includes both the right and the left."

...and Clinton loved you and thought you were the greatest?"

Posted by MikeW

Well, seems Marky nailed it, if you ask me. Your asinine and inexplicable support for this Administration is STUPID, or feigned, (scripted). You simply can't have it both ways.

Personally, "stupid" is not the word I would use to descibe you and your ilk. The term is far too generous and forgiving. But given the choice, whatever I would choose to label you as, it would go hand in hand with the target that would be getting tatooed on your forehead as we shipped your sorry ass to Fallujah to die for your lying monkey's "noble cause".

will we see a kind of alliance with moderate GOP and the dems to keep Bush in check?

If 2006 doesn't change things, I don't know how we will keep this guy under control UNLESS Fitzgerald indicts Rove and Cheney.

howard and pissed off american,
Once again you prove you are unable to talk intelligently about a single issue without attacking the person who has an opposite position.

MikeW, you don't seem to get it: you're not discussing issues. you're not taking positions. you're flinging bullshit propaganda around, which pretty much tells us what kind of person you are.

If you want to discuss issues, go ahead: discuss the issue at hand in this thread: Alito and how we should respond (and issues related to that).

if you want to spew insults, expect to get dissed in return.

wpr is the best public radio (boston is a close second)

you were great this morning, keep up the good work

MikeW,
Want to pick a fight? Try this on for size:
The Republican party is now OFFICIALLY the party of treason. Why do I say that? Hint---the answer is obtained by connected the Alger Hiss case with last week's statements by top Republicans that perjury is not a crime.

Calvin was very distressed to listen to NPR this afternoon and have a special program devoted to the SCOTUS nomination sound like a paid political ad for Salito.

"...without attacking the person who has an opposite position"

Hmm, sounds like something that's been in the news lately...

MikeW - I'm sure we all appreciate your wit, but what's your point on all of these issues? We'd be happy to engage in a constructive dialogue with you, but when you label Dems "baby killers" then I think you're the one who is being obtuse.

Harold,
You are right it was out of line to use "kill babies" could have just said abortion. I apologize to all for using the term.

marky,
Perjury, and obstruction of justice equals treason?

Bill Clinton perjured himself and obstructed an investigation, I don't believe that makes the democratic party treasonous

History has shown that Dumbya doesn't do a very good job of assessing his strength before crying out "BRING EM ON".

So now he's said it to Senate Dems, and anyone who believes that the judiciary should not function as the taliban. Let's show him he's the one doing the misunderestimating again.

(ps, don't feed the trolls. The nomination is meant as a distraction, and doofuses trolling with 'arguments' too weak to be even be from the talking points are an obvious attempt at distraction. Eye on the ball, people!)

gee Mike-it looks like all items on your list are insults rather than positions. Ban God? Just because someone doesn't think Govt should be involved in religion doesn't meant they want to ban God.

Make the federal govt govt bigger and more intrusive? Gee seems like this administration is winning on that score!

Numbers 4 & 5 are just wacko statements. Please, show me some proof that any Democrat is for these items. (and I don't mean wingnuts rants-that is not proof)

Raise taxes- Yup- where and when appropriate, many Democrats do agree with that. Of course, not all...Same with guns. Some do beleive that gun control is important, some don't...

You see, its really a coalition of folks not a ideologue mantra.....

But I'm sure you know better than we do what it is we beleive and stand for- after all, your leaders tell you and you follow....reality? bah humbug...

I just know my wife had to sign a permission form before I could proceed with my vasectomy.

Dan,

Just curious .... was that a State or Federal Law that requires spousal notification? Or was it a hospital regulation, or a requirement of the particular doctor?
Do you believe that abortion and vasectomy are equivalent procedures, as one results in a almost invariably permanent end to fertility?

Louise:
I don't know the Statute that might govern such things here in Wisconsin. At the time, I was mostly bemused that such spousal permission was required.
I don't equate a vasectomy with an abortion (these are very personal), but I find the spousal notification requirements quite interesting.

Everyone needs to read the Toledo Blade series that began yesterday on how the Ohio GOP's pay-to-play schemes, which took off when George Voinovich was governor, got transferred and enhanced by the national Republicans.

There are 5 articles dated Oct. 30; please read them all if you for an inside look at how fundraising gets companies like Timken big contracts, protective legislation and its CEO the ambassador to Germany's job. Read, too, how a religious-right activist from a little-known colonizing church raised so much money for Bush that he got a photo album full of WH-visit photos w/prez & family as a reward. Who's this fundraiser working for now? Ohio SOS Ken Blackwell of election fraud fame, who's the religious-right's Ohio Restoration Project candidate for governor here.

Steve - your wrote: "...is a dependable conservative who apparently has ruled in the past that a woman's reproductive decisions are not hers alone."

Judge Alito's dissent in the ruling you site in the above quote had to do with "notification", not "consent". The state statute that Judge Alito was ruling to uphold required notification of an abortion to the spouse. It is my understanding of the case that the spouse was not required to consent to the woman's decision and the woman could have carried out the abortion even if the spouse disagreed. If this is so, then he actually didn't rule that " a woman's reproductive decisions are not hers alone."

"Bush clearly negated the opportunity to further extend either the racial or gender diversity of the Supreme Court."

You can add to that, religious diversity. I think we now have a majority of Catholics on the Court.

Neocondan:

Regarding your latest post about "notification" vs. "consent," I wonder if this isn't hair-splitting without any practical distinction? Generally, a "notification" that would withstand any legal test would require, in these cases, a spousal signature. But, what if a spouse refuses to affirm notification, i.e., sign off on the notification form? Doesn't the spouse then effectively veto the procedure?

Dan - Good point, but the statute only required that the woman, not the spouse, certify that she had notified her spouse of her decision to have an abortion. Furthermore, the statute didn't require that the certification by the woman be notarized or otherwise authenticated. Therefore, it was Judge Alito's contention that the spousal notification requirement did not violate the Supreme Courts, heretofore, undue burden standard (interestingly enough - established by Justice Oconnor).

Diversity is an interesting concept. Is it of ideas, skin color, religion, ethnic background or gende?

Liberal Demorats told Bush not to nominate well qualified women or minorities whom they disagreed with. See Clarence Thomaas, Priscila Owens, Janice Rodgers Brown, Miguel Estrada, and others. President Bush tried to get a number of well qualified people on the appeals courts and was blocked by an illigal filibuster by liberal demorats. So he goes with an eminently qualified white male. Nothing wrong with that.

PS Ruth Ginsberg was not a mainstream candidate but rather a radical leftist from the ACLU. No one the President can nominate will ever match her extremism.

"...severely judged by their constituents."

Steve, that's the wrong card to play. That is what they are already afraid of. The people are the problem. What we are witnessing is the self- (and again I emphasize, self-)destruction of democracy. Anyone who knows history could have told you that it is inevitable.

Sorry, but any President who would nominate a man who supports the strip-searches of 10 year old girls isn't one who particularly cares if the utter lunacy of his right-wing fellow-travelers is revealed.

I don't care how pro-life you are, I don't see where it anything but blind extremism to actually support a nominee who thinks it's OK for cops to strip search fourth grade girls in their own home because maybe, perhaps, daddy hid drugs on them. If you're a judge, you don't encourage cops to strip down a 4th grader to compensate for the fact they lack the ability found in every elementary school teacher to make a 10 year old kid spill the beans.

A nominee who supports warrantless strip searches of 10 year olds from the President who proposed to restore honor and dignity to the White House? Christ, this makes Monica look tame.

Blitzer just tried to rip apart Joe Wilson during his interview on The Situation. Wilson called him out and fought back.

I believe that Roe Vs. Wade should be overturned and that abortion should be made illegal. It is murder, pure and simple. If you don't see that, pray to God that He would show you truth.

DCoutsider: I agree with you. I want America to see how harsh policies impact their lives. The fence sitters and the moderate swing voters (you know the ones that make the call on elections now!) will then learn about the Big Brother future the right seems to giddily push for.

I am not a liberal and I dislike abortion but guess what? I am not going to judge somebody who decides to get one...why? It is between that person and God.

Fix the unwanted children problem and maybe I will get off the fence and vocally decry abortion but until then? I won't.

But I hope your right. Ban it and when the first batch of young girls die by coathanger, you will then hear America rise up and say it's something we need to reinstate.

neocondan, i'm pleased to see that on this matter, you're a little better informed than you were on Fitzgerald's charter.

Still.

if you're going to discuss the "undue burden" issue, you might at least note that Justice O'Connor, in short, thought that Alito was full of it and completely wrong.

just sayin'.

Karl, do you have any original thoughts, or do you just repeat the silliness that you hear on rush and other outlets of right-wing shrieking? because you realize that what you are saying is nonsense.

You want to see children murdered?? Just look towards Iraq. But hey, thats OK with you folks, isn't it?

You want to see children murdered??? Just look towards Bush's environmental policies. But hey, thats OK with you folks, isn't it?

You want to see children murdered???? Just count the kids with no health insurance. But hey, thats OK with you folks, isn't it?

You want to see children murdered????? Just ponder Bush's appointment of inept unqualified ASS LICKERS to important government posts, such as head of FEMA. But thats OK with you folks, isn't it?

You want to see children murdered????? Just look at our indiscriminate use of DU in Iraq. But hey, thats OK with you folks, isn't it???

You want to see children murdered??? Just have a look at the areas around Tuwaitha, and the other twelve sites in Iraq that were looted of Yellow cake and other hazardous materials because the ignorant smirking buffoon and his pimps didn't have any plans in place to protect those facilities. But hey, thats OK with you folks, isn't it?

Look, heres the deal. This LYING SON OF A BITCH in the White House is responsible for more children's deaths than your worst nightmare could imagine. Life means something to you in the WOMB, but after that, it means nothing to you.

But thats OK with you folks, right?

like i say, neocondan, it's actually more fun when you're informed!

i'd say that when the author of the "undue burden" line of thought tells an interpreter of it that he's wrong, he's wrong. i mean, you can't get more textual fidelity than the author of the words, can you?

now, maybe you don't like the reasoning behind "undue burden," but then it's up to Alito to demonstrate what's wrong with the reasoning, not misapply it.

neocondan, don't ask me to explain how it is that the answer i just wrote to your 12:02 comment showed up as an 11:19 comment mindreading what you were going to say, but it did.

(now watch the same thing happen here - did steve's isp just discover it's standard time? - thereby confusing everyone, me included.)

http://www.campusprogress.org/page/community/post_group/main/CLXc

Howard - I will note that O'Connor did not agree with Alito's reasoning, however, I would also note that O'Connor's undue burden standard is vague enough to drive a truck through (it's similar to the "I'll know it when I see it" standard applied to pornography). Therefore, it is not surprising that O'Connor disagreed with Alito. That doesn't make Alito's line of reasoning wrong.

It's a bit hyperbolic and very misleading to say that this is the first indictment of a "most senior White House official" in 130 years. Cabinet officials have been indicted too regularly in our history. White House staff members have become more important than cabinet officials only relatively recently. It ain't necessary and you're too good for questionable claims.

Pissed Off American:

Stop falling in love with your anger.

I must come out of the shadows if only for a moment. (The hackers succeeded and so I cannot successfully do much with my computer. I've got some professionals looking at my computer so we'll see. Just don't send me anything - I won't be able to open the emails.)

Anyway, first, Steve, I hope you're doing better. The photo of you in the hospital alarmed me at first, but then when you said the driver had approached you, I relaxed. I assume, based on your explanation, that the driver is continuing either directly or indirectly via his insurance company to check on you. I simply hope your back's not killing you anymore.

Hm, well, I've been reading all of the posts and, here, are a few more thoughts to add to the discussion.

(1.) Prior to being "born again", Ms. Miers had somewhat moderate judicial views as evident in her modest paper trail. Bush hoped to use this paper trail to slip Miers underneath the Democrats' door without a fight, all the while knowing from his private discussions with Miers as his attorney, that, after being "born again", she was a true conservative. The only problem with his plan, however, was he thought he could use Rove to keep his base in line. He thought that by simply telling them to just wait and trust him, they would approve her nomination. He was wrong.
2. David Addington and John Hannah? Torture memos? Old timers? Cheney's choice reaffirms for the ten thousandth time exactly who he is.
3. Colonel (Ret) Wilkerson was on the Diane Rehm show last week with Max Boot. Max Boot told Wilkerson that there was no secret cabal, that Bush, Cheney, and Rumsfeld were, in essence, acting in unison. In response to Boot's assertions, Wilkerson repeatedly challeged the President to, then, step forward and take responsibility for tragedies such as Abu Graib.

When will the President come out and take responsibility for GITMO and Abu Graib or, for that matter, any of the other debacles that have occurred during his watch? When will he come out and say General Shinseki and Secretary Tom White were right and Wolfowitz and Rummie were wrong in regards to the so-called peace in Iraq? 1800 deaths (during non-combat) and 15,000 wounded are evidence enough that President Bush has made some very cucial mistakes. When will he step forward and take responsibility? When will he step forward and proclaim there was no cabal? When will he step forward to proclaim as any fine leader would do, "The buck stops, here."
3.Charles Krauthammer had a critical piece in the Washington Post regarding Brent Scowcroft this past Sunday. In the piece, he argued the benefits of idealist foreign policy. He used Reagan as an example that supported his claims. Although I admire Reagan, someone needs to remind Mr. Krauthammer that President Reagan was the man who asked Donald Rumsfeld in 1983 to pay a special visit to a known tyrant, Sadam Hussein, for the purpose of improving our relations with his country, Iraq. Wanting the U.S. to bolster Iraq's attempt to counter Iran,I suppose President Reagan didn't always represent the "idealist", Mr. Krauthammer so eloquently asserts. As far as Brent's concerned, if this is the only criticism the neocons can come up with, I wouldn't be worried at all.
4. I do not know much about Judge Alito so I will not criticize him at this time. I do know, however, that by havng nominated him, President Bush has only broadened the chasm that exists between the right and the left, today. Bush has acted as a divider yet once again.
5. Theorajones, with all due respect, I heartily disagree with you regarding the search of ten year old girls. As long as the police officer is the same sex as the child, I have no problem with the officer doing a search if that officer can articulate that he/she has reaonable suspicion to believe the offender has hidden drugs on the child's person. Why? Because I am some type of sadistic monster? Absolutely not. I have the same passionate desire to protect our nation's youth as you do. That being said, if you do not allow such searches, you will encourage criminals to use innocent children as means for hiding contraband as well as weapons. As Americans, we should not encourage criminals to force their innocent children to be their unwilling accomplices

All this writing; all this talk; words are cheap. Why doesn't someone martyr themselves by commiting a rash act that will shock the country into asking WHY, knowing full well WHY,throwing this land into a much needed final bloody fight to the finish to determine its fate. C'mon, somebody out there, start the ball rolling, sacrifice yourself to a greater good that will be enjoyed after much misery and bloodshed. The greater good? The split of the US into separate sovereign nations, the only solution. But we need a Fort Sumpter moment in the guise of a Lone Wolf's act. How 'bout you POA? You'd do. Ever seriously think of becoming a Saint in martyrdom who changes the course of human history? Any takers out there? Or is it gonna be all talk, no action.

Why you folks even bother with MikeW is beyond my comprehension. You would get better give and take with a mongoloid. He is here with his talking points and his agenda and nothing will move him off of it. He is obviously a trained political hack.

I am a Republican who hates an intrusive government. I am also a person who refuses to be distracted from the real issues, like privacy.

Sen. Rick Santorum has said, in public, that he doesn't believe that there is a "right to privacy" in the Constitution. This means that GRISWALD was decided incorrectly; the state has the right to limit the use of condoms. This is about as intrusive as government can get.

Please, please don't suggest to me that these right-wing Republicans want to limit either the size or scope of government.

"Positive Polarization". Its the policy of dividing he citizenry in an effort to fracture any unified opposition to certain policies or agendas. As the conservative base becomes more and more aware that they have been lied to and used by these traitorous criminals in the White House, we can expect to see more issues and decisions that are designed to drive a wedge between Americans. Bush's worst nightmare is public unity and outcry at his deconstruction of our universal rights and tenets.

Yes. Division is key. People such as Karl Rove dislike blogs such as these where people from both political extremes as well as from the center find common ground. Karl Rove is a man who lives by the old adage "divide and conquer" when matters concern his enemies, and for people such as Karl Rove, and Dick Cheney for that matter, an enemy is anyone who publicly disagrees with them whether that person is someone who works on the inside or the outside of their tight-knit, cloistered circle.

Please keep this in mind as we address such devisive issues as Supreme Court nominees. Let's not allow respectful debate on judicial issues, no matter how substantive theymight be, erase the common ground we share on other issues such as foreign policy. To do so will only help Karl Rove succeed at keeping his enemies powerless and ineffective.

Completely agree sapere --

The single-minded focus on partisanship has encouraged an increasingly ugly us/them mentality that has shifted our focus from what is required of us as Americans to what our different parties require of us.

Not sure the constitution can handle this type of faction -- it is basically the kind of division that James Madison (Federalist #10 I think) thought wouldn't happen in America -- course we made it through the Civil War -- don't want to be too Chicken Little here.

Stiil -- addiction to partisn position has reached almost an Orwellian point with people not even able to see the inconsistencies between what their party stands for and how they think and behave in real life.

To wit

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/10/31/AR2005103101834.html (parents, at least some of whom presumably support the president, trying to prevent their kids from meeting with military recruiters)

See the Post article a few weeks back on an abortion clinic (several women who don't believe in abortion having an abortion ...some not for the first time)

See the WP blog on Scotty's press briefing yesterday (no explanation needed)

See the voting patterns of the lower and middle class voters of the religious right completely voting against their own economic interests

See the immediate partisan finger-pointing on Katrina that helped NOBODY

See the fact that the broadcast media apparently thinks that it is doing its job if it props up two competing talking heads and allows them to go at each other for an equal amount of time -- as if that is the slightest bit informative for the citizens of a democracy.

See the growing arrogance of the Republican Party as it moves closer to controlling all three branches of government -- and see the results of it (war dead and maimed, torture memos and prison abuses, multiple corruption scandals, increasing secrecy on the part of the executive branch of the sort which is anathema in a democracy)

See the bankruptcy of the Democratic party as it backs further and further into its defensive crouch -- responding to partisanship with stock partisan answers

I could go on but no. I've already ruined my day.

MW

Clinton lied about a blow job -- not about an attempt to discredit an administration critic.

Will SOMEONE PLEASE give this president a blow job so Democrats and Republicans can join hands across the aisle to impeach him.

AJ, now you're talking!

To: Not a Liberal, if that's what you're thinking.

Thanks for your comments. Abortion is a moral issue, agreed? You say that the issue of abortion should be between that person and God, is that correct? So, by your argument, basically you are suggesting that any moral matter is between an individual person and God. If that is the case, then all of those anti-war people should stop complaining about the War in Iraq. Why should they stop complaining? By your argument, it really is a matter between George W. Bush and God.

I'm not really trying to pick a fight here. (I'm actually against the war myself and do believe that is a moral matter as well.) I just want to illustrate to you that our Nation and its government has a right to discuss, debate and resolve questions that are moral in nature.

Abortion is really offensive to God.

God thinks he's such a bigshot. Why does he always gotta be concerned about what's goin' on in our pants. What's he preverted or something. Jeez, i'm tellin' ya.

Other issues aside (important, but aside), what confuses me most is the strong religious ideology that political partisanship has been increasingly taken.

The essential reason this country was established and its Constitution written was to allow for religious freedom.

The intent was to allow all people having diverse religious principles to practice their beliefs without fear of prosecution.

The current conflict seems to be centered on abortion and the concept that it is murder and therefore wrong on any moral principal.
But The Bible doesn’t mention abortion explicitly… (www.bfl.org/bible_and_abortion.htm), additionally, rabbinic interpretations of the Hebrew bible are pro choice.
In any case the death penalty is not a recent or nearly as controversial an issue and this seems a great inconsistency if all human life is sacred.

My point is that there seems to be significantly different interpretations on the morality of the death penalty and abortion. And this should place these issues cleanly between an individual and his/her God. Legislators and jurists should not ever consider these issues.

Should strict Constitutionists recognize or even consider this idea?

I wrote this because if I was on the Senate that is what I would ask Mr. Alito.

Is it not that the concept of abortion is right or wrong; but who gets to decide?

To me, it seems to be another manifestation of a partisan power struggle, and that is what makes the current political climate in the US so disgusting.

Mr. Alito has just become the latest battleground.

Abortion is really offensive to God.

That's not what He told me.