One strangely reassuring development in the Miers mess.

[BurtWorm]

I find myself agreeing with people on the right who I thought had absolutely zero redeeming social or intellectual value. Like David Frum, for instance. He may be an elitist, for all I know, but I agree with his essential argument that two of the job requirements for Supreme Court justice are "excellent legal mind" and "fluency with Constitutional issues." (Those aren't his words, but I think he would agree with me.)

Why is this reassuring? Because it reminds one that despite the vastness of the catalogue of disagreements between the American left and right, there is finally some evidence of common ground beneath us.

In the 1960s, the country went through some of its most wrenching periods of disunity. They were exhilirating times, but also exhausting. In the 1970s, a consensus grew around Nixon's downfall that standards of behavior were expected from the government. Arch conservatives may have been seething over Watergate, but most Americans, whether Republican or Democratic, agreed that Nixon was a crook. This consensus on standards for government seemed to provide a basis for agreement on other political issues: that the war in Vietnam was too costly to continue, that detente was a good thing, that women deserved the right to control their reproductive systems. Maybe I fool myself into believing this because it was a Democratic era in Congress and Norman Lear was the great media power of the day. And I'm under no illusion that the 1970s were a golden era. But, after a decade and a half of near total war between left and right, I would welcome an era of peace, at least a respite from the bullshit that broke out into the open in 1992.

If Bush really does become a lame duck, and if the electorate restores the Democrats to power in 2006, we may be in for a period of reconciliation or relaxation of tension. I'm not going to count on it, but wouldn't it be pretty to think so?

[belle]

1. We all breathe oxygen too, but somehow it doesn't warm me toward

them any, you know?

No, I hear what you're saying. it's a nice thought.

[BurtWorm]

6. I know it's hard to see anything good about any of them.

Least of all the idiot who came up with "axis of evil." But he might as well have been speaking for me on Washington Journal this morning when he wouldn't hear the argument from his compadres on the right that you have to trust this "president." (Of course Frum doesn't put scare quotes around that term.) Frum clearly knows what he's talking about when he says she's just not the right caliber, no matter what her politics.

You know, that's what's reassuring, now that I think of it: that politics isn't the whole shebang for Frum, at least. If it were, there would be nothing good about him. But because he values competence above politics, there must be some common ground beneath us somewhere.

[Benhurst]

2. While I share your hope, I still fear this gang of criminals will

not step down. If the continued fixed elections and a corrupt Supreme Court don't protect their power, I fear they are capable of a direct military takeover.

[Demit]

3. I'm still worried that there's another shoe to drop, in the Miers thing.

I can't decide if it was simply a bonehead nomination that was totally *'s idea despite other advice, or if it's a chess move on the part of his puppeteers. Let everybody vent on Miers, then when their anger is spent, the real nominee is put up. The one whose experience can't be questioned, the one who will do real damage. Then any objections will be seen as obstructionist.

Having said that, I hope you're right about the future--everybody agreeing to step back from the abyss.

[Marnieworld]

4. I agree completely

When I found myself recently agreeing with EVERY word that George Will wrote recently I couldn't believe it. Pat Buchanan actually makes sense occassionally. They aren't all 100% in agreement about everything.

It's refreshing when they disagree. This nomination is a big FU to the court and the US system itself. It's an obvious crony appointment that shows how little Bush respects intellectual acheivement and deliberative thought. It shows how all that fancy learnin' is irrelevant. He has no concept of history. At least appoint a constitutional scholar that will vote how you like not some church lady that will just nod at the right moments.

I think it was even Trent Lott that brought up the very valid point that the other justices will not take her seriously at all. She won't be able to rise to their intellect and part of the judicial process (that Jr is clearly ignorant of and lacks respect for) is arguing your point of view to other justices. How could she possibly do this?

George Will said I think that if Bush asked for help from 100 experts on Constitutional Scholarship to suggest 100 names to nominate each not one of the 10000 names would hers. Enough said.

[BurtWorm]

7. Frum said he actually did a survey

of conservatives in DC saying, if Bush had asked you beforehand what you thought of his possibly naming Miers, every single one said something like, "You're kidding, right?"

[Marnieworld]

5. dupe self delete