No one is arguing over that at all. The only argument is over how well she will do in hearings and how may conservative votes she'll cast in rulings next year.
When has GW Bush ever backed down from a decision? You guys are pursuing a course of action to make the Congress more liberal. If you don't think Democrats are more liberal, just who do you think their nominee would be? Rather than looking for pro-life evidence they'd be looking for pro Choice evidence.
Opponents of Miers need to think very carefully about their intentions and whether or not those intentions advance liberalism.
As always, these things are not about what you can gain. They are about what you can avoid losing. All actions must be viewed in terms of denying Democrats the right to nominate left wing extremist Justices. No one can call Miers that.
Those that want the Miers nomination withdrawn should go to this website. It is probably more suited for them:
http://www.democraticunderground.com
Yes, it's infinitely frustrating that the debate is WITHIN the GOP, rather than contra the Dems. An interesting piece by David Broder suggests that this fight, in some form, was inevitable: "A valuable historical perspective on all this came from Stephen Skowronek of Yale University in a talk to the American Political Science Association just before Labor Day. At the time, it seemed a bold -- even questionable -- thesis. Now it looks prescient.
"Skowronek, a presidential scholar, defined Bush as "an orthodox innovator," meaning someone who inherits a governing doctrine from others -- in his case, Ronald Reagan -- but applies it in different circumstances and with different techniques....
"Skowronek said that historically what leads to ultimate failure for orthodox innovator presidents is "sectarian infighting." They fail, he said, not because the political opposition becomes so strong but because their own supporters fall out among themselves -- some insisting on the original orthodoxy of the inherited philosophy, others demanding more change to adapt to the new conditions." The rest is at www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/10/07/AR2005100701700.html.
So what do we do to get back on track?
I have to say, that of all the vanities I've read on the Miers pick, this is the most recent.
Or maybe we can agree that something is wrong with the people who are raising such an unholy stink from a position of sheer ignorance.
IMHO there is nothing wrong with this pick; the problem is delusional people like you who think that you actually have any chance to influence the President to pull the nomination.
So no, we don't all agree.
Next time you write a vanity, speak for yourself only, and try to come up with something worthwhile to say. Don't assume you know what other people are thinking, because you don't -- especially where the President is concerned. You'll see Elvis before you see the President back down on this.
I doubt everyone here can agree on anything. LOL
I disagree.
Or we can all just post vanities with lots and LOTS of exclamations points in the super vain hope that SOMEONE will read them.....