...it's not dark yet, but it's gettin' there...

July 06, 2005

The Playbook

UporDownVote.com predicts a ten step plan for Democratic opposition to whomever is announced as President Bush's choice to replace Justice O'Connor.

1. Before a vacancy is announced – whip your membership into a frenzy with overblown rhetoric...

2. …while preparing for battle.

3. Once a nominee is named, immediately announce that the nominee’s record “raises more questions than it answers.” (Note: there will never be enough documents released, proof provided, or enough questions answered in order to satisfy the Left.)

4. Plead for a slower pace.

5. If the nominee is rated highly qualified by the ABA, dismiss this as a prerequisite for the job. If the nominee receives anything less than the highest qualifications, express outrage.

6. Force the nominee to pledge allegiance to a liberal ideology.

7. Ah-HAAAA!!! – The Left’s research will reveal a few “alarming” findings or “smoking guns.”

8. Previously released findings re-released as “research” and distributed by the media.

9. Liberal Hollywood Celebrities make an 11th hour appearance.

10. FINALLY, official opposition is coordinated and announced in a drip-drip fashion.

i would add that in general, the left's strategy will be to buy time by attacking the nominee's ideology and philosophy until they can uncover something more base to accuse him or her with. Some gossipy scandal that appeals to least common denominator. This is what happened with Clarence Thomas, remember? It's what they tried with Arnold Schwarzenegger,* and what they're trying to do with John Bolton.** And let's be fair, it's what Ken Starr did to Bill Clinton.

Since we all know that the liberals will vehemently oppose anybody Bush picks (Why wouldn't they? Today's liberal leadership haven't an ounce of principle.) Bush has an incredible opportunity that he should not pass up. He should appoint an in-your-face conservative to replace the moderate O'Connor.

Loyalty and friendship should not factor into Bush's decision. He should absolutely not nominate Alberto Gonzalez, for instance. Now, i don't know whether the rap on Berto is true or false. But i do know that he is perceived as squishy, and that is enough. Nominating Gonzalez would be a signal of capitulation and would squander the great opportunity i mentioned above.

Since everybody expects the liberals to dump on the nominee, if Bush appoints a true ideological conservative, people may be naturally skeptical of any attacks against the nominee. This is the same effect we saw in the recent presidential election, when the outrageous slanders against Bush from Hollywood et al. reached a critical mass. Middle America rejected the slurs, and the polls reflected their rejection.

Senators read polls too, even lilly-livered Republican Senators. What i'd like to see is Bush appoint a staunch conservative with a well documented paper trail to prove it. Then i'd like to see Dr. Frist grow a fucking spine and do his job. i know Bush will back his nominee to the bitter end, he's proven that. If the nominee is willing to absorb the baseless, hypocritical attacks (like Thomas did) and stick it out, i think we might have a good chance to restore some sanity to the Supreme Court.

* And never forget who the chief accomplice was in the effort to assassinate Schwarzenegger's character during the recall election: The Los Angeles Times. Now that the election is over, one wonders why the Times has completely abandoned pursuit of all those groping accusations that once warranted front page coverage.

** If you really think that the Democrats' opposition to Bolton is based on principle, ask yourself whether they would have given two shits about Bolton's personality if he had been appointed by a Democratic president. Then you might want to talk to a few ex DiFi staffers, and see how they liked working for her. Not to mention Hillary staffers.

Posted by annika, Jul. 6, 2005 | TrackBack (0)
Rubric: annikapunditry


The paradigm has changed since the Thomas nomination. Back then the left had a total death grip on information reaching the public.

Today that is no longer true. Americans have the alternative media now and a vehicle to learn the truth. IF the nominee and the Republicans have courage, sanity may be restored to the Supreme court. (that is an awfully big IF)

Posted by: Jake on Jul. 6, 2005

Y my dear, not even ONE shit!

Jake, yet even then that ugly whore Nina VanTotenberg had to go into hiding. It's an ill wind that doesn't blow some good.

Posted by: Casca on Jul. 6, 2005

Really, I'd like to see Bork brought back up, just to see the fireworks. It would make the November meltdowns seem like a sitcom.

My money is on Janice Rogers Brown. I'm asking for my donations back if he tries putting Gonzales in.

Posted by: digitalbrwonshirt on Jul. 6, 2005

Too bad Bork's in bad health. i don't know if he'd take it anyway. He's a bigger curmudgeon than Casca these days, God bless 'im.

Hugh Hewitt doesn't thin JRB is seasoned enough. i happened to catch oral arguments in the Cal Supreme Court a few months ago, and i couldn't get a read on her. She asked only one or two questions and didn't seem interested most of the time. Or maybe she was thinking deep thoughts.

Posted by: annika on Jul. 6, 2005

i say nominate hillary.
we all know she would decline.
bush can say, "i nominated one of yours. now i'll nominate one of mine."
if she did accept(not a snowballs chance in hell), that would take her out of '08, and put her on the bench for life. the way things are/should going, there will be a build up of conservatives on the bench.
one wack job liberal with 8 conservatives.
that's fair.

Posted by: louielouie on Jul. 7, 2005

I think Bush should disregard "seasoned enough." What the hell good does "seasoned enough" do? If a 35 year old can be President, and a non-lawyer can be on the SC, and "seasoned" SC Justices can pull monumentally incompetent decisions out of their asses at any moment, then "seasoned enough" is stinkin thinkin.

Also, as political jujitsu, it is a losing position for Bush to require "seasoned enough" for his own nominees. First, this allows the Dems to delay nominees like Estrada, JRB, and Patricia Owen, then throw down the "seasoned enough" card when a Repub President is ready to nominate. Second, "seasoned enough" didn't stop the monumentally unseasoned Ginsberg from receiving 90 votes in favor of confirmation. I love Hugh Hewitt, but he is wrong on this; and his wrong opinion is not moving us closer to getting a principled originalist onto the SC.

Posted by: gcotharn on Jul. 7, 2005