I didn't say we would be united if not for Harry Reid. But his specific ploy is working at the moment.
The evidence is in the constant quoting of Harry Reid's supposed support of Miers as absolute proof that Bush has betrayed us all. The further implication is that Bush is dumb. If not a Lefty himself, Bush would have to be dumber than a rock to get his pick from Harry Reid, and that is exactly what he he being accused of by many on the "right".
This is becoming la la land. Like the land of the Left. It has now infected many of us. Ad nauseum, ad nauseum, ad nauseum. It is everywhere. You can't look up without seeing it or listen without hearing it.
You missed the part where I said the use of Reid's "support" as evidence of left-leaning my Ms. Miers is a superficial argument. It doesn't even withstand application of the facts - for one thing, Reid's "support" is "relief the nominee is not on the short 'must filibuster' list."
This is becoming la la land. Like the land of the Left. It has now infected many of us. Ad nauseum, ad nauseum, ad nauseum. It is everywhere. You can't look up without seeing it or listen without hearing it.
This is a chat room. Most of the chat is idle and superficial. In all the noise, there is some signal.
FR is a difficult tool to use, but rewarding if one takes the time to filter through the crap.
Understood, and I certainly didn't take your comment that way. I took it as Reid's stance being used as a wedge. I agree that Reid's stance is thrown out as support for the proposition that Ms. Miers is left-leaning. I dismiss that connection out of hand. It's a BS connection, and while it merits independent research, needn't be refuted by the serious student.
The other point I was making was that whether Reid liked her or not, some conservatives would express disappointment in the nomination. That expression, ON ITS OWN, is enough to create division. See Bush cheerleaders.