Thursday, October 27, 2005

1674 Democrats demand a moderate

Now that Hurricane Harriet has passed out to sea, Democrats are regrouping and saying they hope Bush selects a moderate. Like Ruth Bader Ginsberg perhaps? Did they demand that Clinton nominate a moderate? George Bush really isn't much of a conservative except on abortion, and if he thinks he can save a few babies in the next 30 years by successfully nominating a pro-life judge, I say, it's worth a try. I doubt that the laws will ever be turned back, but some of those babies just might grow up to be president some day, or help pay your Medicare bill and Social Security.

Update: Now about all that caving in to the extreme right wing: Jeff Goldstein writes--"Question: how many “bases” does the President have, exactly? I mean, for years we’ve been hearing from Democrats and the legacy media how James Dobson, Hugh Hewitt, the evangelicals, et al, are Bush’s “right wing” conservative base—but these are the very people who, in addition to GOP party pragmatists, by and large were most supportive of the Miers nomination.

And yet today, all I’m hearing is that Bush caved to his “extremist” “right wing base.” "
HT Sister Told Jah

I wondered about that, too. So are there right-wing-secularist like Ann Coulter and George Will who were having hissy fits about Harriet, and right-wing-religious like Dobson and Hewitt? Or are the Democrats just mad because now they'll have to have a real debate about issues involving the court.


Anvilcloud said...

My take? A non-divisive character is needed. Republicans detested Clinton; Democrats detest Bush. This is not a good situation.

Norma said...

You're right. And I think the Republicans are getting just what they dished out. At this point, I don't know who would be non-devisive.