Cannibals
George Bush sounded pleased as punch to announce that his lawyer would be the next white lady on the Supreme Court. Only it doesn't seem like it's going to go down that way.
There's a rising tide of anger washing across right blogistan, the so-called values bloggers and their more main-streamed media friends agast that Bush would appoint someone so, well, not crazy in the social conservative persuasion. What's this? Not a social conservative? What the heck kind of beast is this Miers, then?
Well, for one interpretation, check out what Kos is saying. Huh, corporate cronyism trumps conservative moral values? Well, if the war in Iraq (a freaking war!) and all the associated no-bid contracts didn't make that obvious by now, well, I can't help you. But then, that's foreign policy. And maybe there are a bunch of end-timesers who needed appeasing, or anyways maybe that's what it looked like to the social conservatives. But now they're realizing what smart friends of mine have been saying all along - the values thing was a facade. It was about votes, not a revolution. This crowd has always recognized the importance of placating the people giving the money (business moguls), not the legions of voters (even the Leviticus freaks). Single-issue bible-skimmers were just an easily exploited demographic.
Atrios has his own reaction to the outrage over Miers. It's perhaps worth quoting:
Wingnuttia is rather angry at the choice. I don't think this is because they're really concerned that she's not conservative enough for their tastes, although that's part of it. They're angry because this was supposed to be their nomination. This is was their moment. They didn't just want a stealth victory, they wanted parades and fireworks. They wanted Bush to find the wingnuttiest wingnut on the planet, fully clothed and accessorized in all the latest wingnut fashions, not just to give them their desired Court rulings, but also to publicly validate their influence and power. They didn't just want substantive results, what they wanted even more were symbolic ones. They wanted Bush to extend a giant middle finger to everyone to the left of John Ashcroft. They wanted to watch Democrats howl and scream and then ultimately lose a nasty confirmation battle. They wanted this to be their "WE RUN THE COUNTRY AND THERE'S NOTHING YOU CAN DO ABOUT IT" moment.
Whatever kind of judge she would be, she doesn't provide them with that.
Either way, the funny is starting to happen, and the party of staunch, unwavering (or unreasoning) righteousness is beginning to fracture:
Just spoke with a staffer for a conservative member of the Judiciary Committee whose boss is extremely unhappy about the nomination of Harriet Miers . . . There is now talk among some conservatives about a filibuster of the Miers nomination . . .
There's a rising tide of anger washing across right blogistan, the so-called values bloggers and their more main-streamed media friends agast that Bush would appoint someone so, well, not crazy in the social conservative persuasion. What's this? Not a social conservative? What the heck kind of beast is this Miers, then?
Well, for one interpretation, check out what Kos is saying. Huh, corporate cronyism trumps conservative moral values? Well, if the war in Iraq (a freaking war!) and all the associated no-bid contracts didn't make that obvious by now, well, I can't help you. But then, that's foreign policy. And maybe there are a bunch of end-timesers who needed appeasing, or anyways maybe that's what it looked like to the social conservatives. But now they're realizing what smart friends of mine have been saying all along - the values thing was a facade. It was about votes, not a revolution. This crowd has always recognized the importance of placating the people giving the money (business moguls), not the legions of voters (even the Leviticus freaks). Single-issue bible-skimmers were just an easily exploited demographic.
Atrios has his own reaction to the outrage over Miers. It's perhaps worth quoting:
Wingnuttia is rather angry at the choice. I don't think this is because they're really concerned that she's not conservative enough for their tastes, although that's part of it. They're angry because this was supposed to be their nomination. This is was their moment. They didn't just want a stealth victory, they wanted parades and fireworks. They wanted Bush to find the wingnuttiest wingnut on the planet, fully clothed and accessorized in all the latest wingnut fashions, not just to give them their desired Court rulings, but also to publicly validate their influence and power. They didn't just want substantive results, what they wanted even more were symbolic ones. They wanted Bush to extend a giant middle finger to everyone to the left of John Ashcroft. They wanted to watch Democrats howl and scream and then ultimately lose a nasty confirmation battle. They wanted this to be their "WE RUN THE COUNTRY AND THERE'S NOTHING YOU CAN DO ABOUT IT" moment.
Whatever kind of judge she would be, she doesn't provide them with that.
Either way, the funny is starting to happen, and the party of staunch, unwavering (or unreasoning) righteousness is beginning to fracture:
Just spoke with a staffer for a conservative member of the Judiciary Committee whose boss is extremely unhappy about the nomination of Harriet Miers . . . There is now talk among some conservatives about a filibuster of the Miers nomination . . .
posted by onlooker at 12:21 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home