[Common Tator]

If Bush loses in November, the Democrats will take the House and the Senate.

Did I mention that Kerry would appoint the next Chief Justice to the Supreme Court. And that would be.

William Jefferson Clinton.

The only way Kerry wins is if Bill and Hillary don't try to defeat him. HIllary wants the nomination in 2008.

The only way for Kerry to stop that is to promise to make Bill Clinton Chief Justice of the Supreme Court.

Don't think they don't have the FBI files to get it done.

[Zipporah]

It certainly is a dilemma for conservatives. I long for the days of gridlock. At least the Republicans in Congress would stand up and fight, as it is we are basically screwed. The insane spending spree must stop. And what is troubling, the will of the people is being dismissed. It's not by the people nor for the people.

[Ohioan]

The key to achieving that dream, of course, is to carefully select an electable conservative for 2008 who will remain true to the conservative vision and not cause conservatism to fall victim again to the paradox of unified control.

It is not too soon to start looking for that candidate.

You are right. But we cannot afford another mistake.

William Flax Return Of The Gods Web Site

[Moose4]

I see your point, but this is where your argument falls down:

If SCOTUS vacancies open up, he will see his nominees scrutinized and resisted with a zeal that can only be expected and carried out by a Republican-controlled Senate Judiciary Committee that has suffered through years of kidney-punches and eye-gouging in judicial appointment hearings by a Democrat minority (it would help immensely if the spineless, Kennedy-appeasing Orrin Hatch were replaced as Committee Chair)/.

No they won't. They never have before, there is no reason to think that they will start now. There would have to be a turnover, a revolution, in the Senate far bigger than the 1994 House elections to give the Senate GOP enough cojones to do something like this. A Democratic President would be able to pack the Federal judiciary, up to and including the Supreme Court, with so many liberal activist judges that our system of checks and balances would be totally screwed for a generation, maybe longer, maybe forever. And the Senate will not stop him, no matter who runs it.

I'm automatically leery of any stratagery (tm GWB) that requires losing to win. And while I'm not a "Bushbot", and I don't agree with a good bit of GWB's domestic agenda, I just can't see risking the security of the country by letting a Rat run things for four years. Monsieur F'in Kerry, or the Breck Girl, or Howard the Duck, or even Hillary!(tm), would not prosecute the War on Terror in the way it needs to be prosecuted.

I agree that we have got to find a more conservative Presidential candidate in 2008, that's not really debatable. But GWB is our best bet in 2004.

}:-)4

[Dane]

You "true conservatives" got 2nd degree burns when you all helped elect Clinton back in 92.

I guess you all are going for 3rd degree burns in 04.

[ex-snook]

ping for conservatives.

[Scenic Sounds]

Any Democrat president will also have to choose between spending cuts or raising taxes. If he chooses the latter, he will see his support plummet as the economic recovery sputters and stalls.

Isn't that what the Republican leadership said in 1993?

Nice piece, Kevin! It looks like you put a lot of thought into this.

[joesbucks]

Obviously you are a troll. Abuse button material.

[NittanyLion]

While I understand where you're coming from, I don't think anything positive will come if a Democrat wins the White House in November.

That said, you obviously put a lot of time and effort into this well-written piece. Reminds me of the days when I first joined FreeRepublic, and the majority of the posts were actually substantive. Thanks for elevating the debate.

[Sir Gawain]

Never thought I'd see you post something like this.

[CMAC51]

Flawed logic start to finish. A Dem in the Whitehouse will easily extract themselves from Iraq. Just turn it over to the UN and leave. It's the wrong thing to do, but it will play to the base.

The economy will be booming, so the deficit will be going down and can be blamed on Bush anyway. No problem there.

The Republicans have never effectively resisted anything in the Senate and with a Dem in the Whitehouse, the mantra will be MANDATE and the Repubs will fold like a dirty shirt. Judicial appointments will sail through.

Do not make the mistake of thinking that the Republicans holding the line against any Clinton initiatives had anything to do with true gridlock. It all had to do with Clinton's inability to keep it in his pants. The odds of the next Dem in the Whitehouse having that problem are low.

There is no conservative candidate who will satisfy the conservative base because the conservative base can't be satisfied.

Two truths have become apparent in United States politics. The Democrat base will support their party no matter what it does and the Republican base will abandon their party no matter what it does.

[RJCogburn]

Excellent post, Kevin.

Just excellent.

[monkeywrench]

"If SCOTUS vacancies open up, he will see his nominees scrutinized and resisted with a zeal that can only be expected and carried out by a Republican-controlled Senate Judiciary Committee that has suffered through years of kidney-punches and eye-gouging in judicial appointment..."

At which point, he will pull out his pen and write an Executive Order. Stroke of the pen, law of the land. A SCOTUS appointment is too important ( all the marbles) to be left to a democrat with a pen.

[Always Right]

Gridlock is great, but the fastest way to send American to a European hell is to let Democrats appoint judges.

[jwalsh07]

If SCOTUS vacancies open up, he will see his nominees scrutinized and resisted with a zeal that can only be expected and carried out by a Republican-controlled Senate Judiciary Committee that has suffered through years of kidney-punches and eye-gouging in judicial appointment hearings by a Democrat minority (it would help immensely if the spineless, Kennedy-appeasing Orrin Hatch were replaced as Committee Chair).

Hatch will be replaced Kevin, by Arlen Specter.

You elect a democrat as President, you get liberal courts. Thats the history and the fact. To deny it is folly.

[Gangsta FReeper From Da Hood]

Great post! BUMP

[iopscusa]

Thanks for posting the argument, certainly is interesting to consider and the input from fellow posters is also interesting....obviously there are some base problems for the re-election of GWB. Better to get the issues into the light of day, don't be dismayed by the attacks, it only shows fear. What good is that, open the discussion, conservatism is not a monolithic creed and certainly is not owned by any political party.....oh yeah, I don't need any advice and really don't appreciate the personal attacks, but reasoned arguments are always appreciated.

[Tench_Coxe]

What gets missed is that the system of government in the US was purposely set up to create a gridlock of sorts. There is an intricate set of checks and balances.

[the invisib1e hand]

The Paradox of Unified Control–How Conservatives Can Win Without Bush

Don't believe conservatives would want to.

[DManA]

Excellent essay.