Miers withdraws

  • Well, son-of-a-gun.

    I was hop­ing for a less bile-filled write-up of this than the yahoo link above. You can almost hear the bold­face in their open­ing para­graph, can’t you? “Under with­er­ing attack from con­ser­v­a­tives, Pres­i­dent Bush aban­doned his push to put loy­al­ist Har­riet Miers on the Supreme Court and promised a quick replace­ment Thurs­day. Democ­rats accused him of bow­ing to the ‘rad­i­cal right wing of the Repub­li­can Party.’” YAAAAH!!! It’s a good day to be a jour­nal­ist!!!

    How about this one? She wasn’t a good nom­i­nee. She didn’t have the back­ground, and no one left, mid­dle or cen­ter could find any rea­son to feel good about her qual­i­fi­ca­tions. By with­draw­ing — and by the way, she with­drew, Bush didn’t aban­don her — she allows for a bet­ter candidate.

    The part where they could go all bold­face if they wanted is in think­ing that Bush’s next pick may be the kind of no-kidding-around con­ser­v­a­tive that I would’ve liked to see orig­i­nally. But the fact that there is still the incred­i­bly strong push from the MSM to make ‘con­ser­v­a­tive’ a dirty word is part of the rea­son for that. Enough’s enough with these guys. Call their bluff — they have no power to moti­vate sig­nif­i­cant demo­graph­ics. What the heck — go ahead and nom­i­nate Rush Lim­baugh. They’ll break the print­ing presses load­ing up all the bold­face on that one.


    Related posts:

    1. More on Miers
    2. A touch of Miers zeitgeist
    3. Bush nom­i­nated … who now?
    4. Are hur­ri­canes racist?
    5. Supreme!

    October 27th, 2005 | Grace | No Comments |

Leave a Reply

* Name, Email, and Comment are Required