Yeah yeah. Sure sure.
Posted on 10/20/2005 1:15:35 PM PDT by Pukin Dog
“The army is not properly equipped for an invasion of an enemy's territory. It lacks much of the material of war, is feeble in transportation, the animals being much reduced, and the men are poorly provided with clothes, and in thousands of instances are destitute of shoes. Still we cannot afford to be idle, and though weaker than our opponents in men and military equipments, must endeavor to harass, if we cannot destroy them. I am aware that the movement is attended with much risk, yet I do not consider success impossible, and shall endeavor to guard it from loss.” – Robert E. Lee (September 3, 1862 – Letter to Jefferson Davis)
Last week, with considerable difficulty, I posted that I had changed my mind and decided to support the nomination of Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court. I hope that this post will help some of you understand why this nomination must be supported until it is either withdrawn or it succeeds in gaining Senate confirmation.
I make no bones about the fact that I believe that the nomination of Harriet Miers is a very, very large mistake by the Bush administration, probably the biggest mistake that they have made in office. I believe the choice to have been one made in the heat of battle, under duress and strain over the surprise decline of prior selections, against the goal of completing Senate confirmation before the end of November. A selection of a willing candidate had to be made, and the President mis-stepped in rushing to select Harriet Miers without proper vetting.
So, in light of that, (which is all true) why am I now suggesting that Harriet Miers should be supported?
Because this is war.
We Conservatives are at the brink of victory, where the enemy is most dangerous. Just as you have seen in Iraq, at the time of nearing victory is exactly the time when the enemy becomes more violent and deadly in their attacks. It is not because we are losing the war, that we find our leaders either attacked in the media, or worse; the continued attempts to criminalize Conservatives through the legal system. It is happening because we are winning.
We are winning in spite of the fact that our Conservative Army is in very, very bad condition after years of battle against our Liberal opponent. Our leadership in the Senate consists mostly of tired, beaten, scared members, most of them unwilling to take the fight to the enemy for fear of losing the ground they have gained.
In any war, it is always a goal to destroy leadership first. You target and attack the enemies Generals as a common early tactic. Our enemies have never been able to defeat the likes of Tom Delay or Karl Rove on the battlefield of ideas, so they now seek to remove them from the war altogether through continued attempts to remove them from their winning positions. The enemy if successful can weaken our leader by removing his warriors from the fight. Our enemies understand the unfortunate truth that there are only a few true warriors left in our political army, and if they can get to them (through our failure to protect their flank) they can then gain ground simply by limiting our ability to attack them. No war is won on the defense, and on the defense is where we are. We are not on the defense because of the decisions of one George W. Bush; we are on the defense because his Army is tired and weak, and also there are phony among them.
Anyone who believes that an Arlen Specter or a John McCain is going to fight to the death for Conservative principles is an absolute fool. If you think that Trent Lott or Orrin Hatch won’t sell your Conservatism down the river for another 6 years feeding at the public troth then respectfully, you are dumber than dirt.
In war, you must have no weak areas for the enemy to attack, and we have a lot of them. We attack Bush for signing Campaign Finance reform much more than we attack John McCain for creating it. We attack Bill Frist for not going Nuclear; instead of attacking the RINOs who would have obviously defeated the measure had Frist tried it.
In the Miers nomination, I believe the President looked at his situation, and the conditions of his troops, and took the path of Robert E. Lee; choosing not to lose, when faced with a situation where the condition of his troops made it impossible for him to win. In doing so, he repeated a mistake that many, many leaders have made before him. He made a decision from weakness, and that cannot be denied.
We can (and should) attack George Bush when he makes poor decisions from a weak position, but now is the time to attack those who put him in the weak position to begin with. You can’t really blame the Democrats, because they are who they are. We know their tactics and should be better prepared for them. You can’t blame the RINOs for the same reason. If you know your enemy, then there is no excuse for allowing him victories against you.
So where does that leave us?
As has been made clear before; “You go to war with the Army you’ve got, not the one you want”. That is where we are. Right now, we may not feel so great about our Army, but are we going to let them be defeated because we don’t agree with their tactics and methods? Sure, we can stand back and wait, or leap from the train because we are mad at the conductor, or we can dance with the one who brought us, people.
Now, forgive my over-use of clichés, but that’s the best I can do at the moment.
We voted for the man, we stood with him and defeated our enemies at every turn. Victory is near, and our enemy has ramped up their attacks, hoping we will shrink from the fight.
Let us stay the course, and stay on the side of President Bush. He is not a perfect man, but he is our man. In war, sometimes that just has to be enough. Now can we lower our voices enough to remember what side we are on in this fight? Every one of us has the right to criticize the general direction our leadership is taking at the moment. Whether it is spending, the borders, Miers, Iraq, whatever. We should never forget that those in Washington work for us, and are subject to our approval. That does not mean however, that we should help our enemies defeat us by handing over our leaders at gunpoint.
I believe the debate can only strengthen us, but we should keep it as debate and not open warfare against our side. The war for Conservative ideas will not be won during the term of our current President, but I think if we want more and better Generals down the road, we need to stand with this one.
Win or lose, I’m standing with President Bush.
This is Pukin Dog's last vanity post.
Thanks Puke I feel the same way
Your last vanities are begining to sound like the day when everything changed.
As far as I can tell, she is every bit as conservative as George Bush.--FReeper NCSteve.
You said that last time too. ;-)
I am here, too.
I bet a dollar it ain't.
I wouldn't want to take that bet, either.
After Roberts, I am willing to give President Bush a pass on this one. Not the next one.(assuming at least one more nomination) I do reserve the right to continue p*ssing and moaning about lack of leadership on border issues and other stuff. :)
I've got a quarter that says you won't be able to keep that promise.
I'm standing by Bush, too. I just wish the girlie men at NRO spent as much time attcking Democrats and the RINOs in Congress as do our president.
I haven't liked everything GWB has done either, but every time I think of the alternative (J F'n K) I just shudder. We do have to stand and fight.
Yeah yeah. Sure sure.
Worked out real well for R.E. Lee and the cause for which he fought.
What is this, a reverse auction?
We are going into battle with King Pyrrhus...
Great post, P Dog! I agree with you. Pragmatism and victory come first.
Don't let this be your last vanity, though. You have written some fine ones, lately.
Wooof!
Excellent Post! Have a doggie biscuit!
The very day of the nomination I was unable to read any posts until that evening. When I saw the completely over-the-top attacks, I decided then-and-there that there was no alternative to standing by the President for many of the same reasons you mentioned above -- with one addition: I believe anyone who thinks defeating the President on this nomination will lead to the nomination and confirmation of a known opponent of R v W like Edith Jones or Janice Rogers Brown is delusional beyond belief. Defeat will weaken the President at the gain of the 'Rats, not Conservatives.
It is a war. It's a war between small government conservatives and big government statists. And Bush is not on the small government side. Neither, apparently, is the Republican party.
Very well stated, Pukin Dog.
Let us stay the course, and stay on the side of President Bush. He is not a perfect man, but he is our man. In war, sometimes that just has to be enough
I trust him
Yo, Dog
We (The Royal WE) don't mind your vanities.
A lot of thought and effort went into post. Whether I agree with all your points is for another time.
Thanks for putting it up just the same...
It is war… a war we must win. Able Danger. The Barrett Report. No time to cut and run.
Good read PING!
The Britney Spears doctrine.
Yeah, right. Good grief, your every fleeting whim is NOT news and is NOT deserving of its own thread.
Who?
Peace out........
I'm with you, man.
I don't agree with everything Bush does, and don't think he's perfect, BUT I SURE AS HELL AM NOT GOING TO JOIN IN THE ORGY OF TEARING HIM DOWN AND ATTACKING, WHEN ALL OF MY SWORN ENEMIES HAVE BEEN DOING SO 24/7, SINCE EVEN BEFORE HE WAS SWORN IN. To me, that's like telling your wife she's fat ("Hey, I noticed you're getting fat"), while some stranger is raping her again and again and again. Utterly despicable behavior.
Rush turned me on to FR back in the summer of '04.
I was not going to vote for GWB again, new tone, tedkenney education bill, harkin energy bill, out of control spending, etc.
But with the WOT and tax cuts I knew we could not live with JFnK...
I reserve the right to complain if JRB is not nominated when one of the liberal fossils dies on the supreme court
Pray for W and Our Freedom Fighters
I basically agree with what you're saying... I just want to stress that our white house did have a part in determing this "army" that we have to work with. It's not like a 1st year college football coach that is playing with somebody elses recruits. Our white house backed a lot of these rinos.
I trust him
Worth repeating once again.
Kool-Aid? No thanks.
Win or lose, I'm standing with conservative principles.
My feelings exactly. BUT I have decided not to moan anymore about Miers...what would be the point?
It is Bush's choice..let him have it..but on those things NOT his sole choice..such as merging USA with Canada and Mexico..I will fight down to my last drop of blood for the CONSTITUTION.
Miers better do the same.
bttt
Of course, this answer presumes you were serious about not knowing who she is.
It is old line, liberal appointments vs the new regime.
And I'll throw 50 cents in the kitty on Pukin's last vanity post.
I'm inclined to reach the same conclusion because I think the consequences of a withdrawal now would be even worse than the damage done by the nomination in the first place.
If she is withdrawn and, say, Luttig is nominated, the Dems and MSM will howl that Bush caved to his "extremists" and proposes to replace Justice O'Connor, Saint Moderation, with Attila the Hun himself. A filibuster would be assured and with the media winds at gale force winning enough of the Gang of 14 to break it would be questionable if not doubtful. A successful filibuster would probably embolden the Dems to to it again with a third pick, a pretty good possibility given the age and health of some Justices.
To borrow from your war analogy, the only guage of success in war is achievement of the objective, not fighting the good fight. We need to maintain a mission orientation.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.