And yeah, how tone-deaf do you have to be to employ political patronage NOW?

Tone deaf? Or just don't care?

I'd say that it's pretty unusual to nominate someone with this low a profile.

Actually, this is how they're operating. For someone like Edith Brown, we would already have a massive amount of data on decisions, court demeanor, etc. Someone like Miers, you have nothing, and since her main experience has been at the Bush White House, aka "I'm sorry, but we can't tell you what's for dinner, it's classified."

Unfortunately, it also hurts them with conservatives, because they want a name. Never mind that the last "name" they threw up there, Robert Bork, went nowhere (and contrary to what they'll tell you, it was his beliefs on Brown v. Board of Education that ultimately screwed him).

Miers is about to become the Michael Brown of the Supreme Court.

We're probably only a few months away from the White House selling indulgences. They've already knocked "schism" and "crusade" off the "be like the bad ol' Catholic Church" to-do list.

I'm darkly amused by the comments saying, "Bush is history." Well, see, it's his second term, so there's only so much that can happen to him, because -- oh that's right -- you voted for his reelection! Oops, sorry. I imagine the party's pissed off because he might turn moderates away from voting Republican -- but is that really likely? They wouldn't vote for him again, but will there really be repercussions for other Reps? I suppose they'd better distance themselves.

Actually, this is how they're operating. For someone like Edith Brown, we would already have a massive amount of data on decisions, court demeanor, etc. Someone like Miers, you have nothing, and since her main experience has been at the Bush White House, aka "I'm sorry, but we can't tell you what's for dinner, it's classified."

But disagreement with her on the issues isn't the only reason they can oppose her. It doesn't make her invulnerable. Her very lack of judicial or other demonstrable experience/expertise is reason enough, frankly, and I hope there are people of both sides of the aisle who'll run with it.

I think repercussions do tend to hurt other party members. Especially when a party is in lockstep top to bottom, as the Republicans are now. The top looks hinky, the bottom starts to look hinky as well. The top has had some really bad luck of late, with all of its scandals hitting at the same time.

Robert Bork, went nowhere (and contrary to what they'll tell you, it was his beliefs on Brown v. Board of Education that ultimately screwed him).

What, you mean it wasn't his ability to write an incredibly bad millenarian novel? It wasn't his tendency to scold like a kindergarten teacher from a Roald Dahl fantasy? It wasn't his really bad facial hair?

I think he went nowhere because he came across as Ted Kaczynski, rather than as a Distinguished Person. Roberts, who for all we know is just as extreme, has helmet-head and a retiring manner, so everybody is willing to live with him.

I wonder if many of the Republicans up for reelection in '06 will turn on Bush?

Is bon bon around? Pat Kiernan profile.

Does anyone here watch Crossing Jordan? I continue to be confused by people's jobs (like are Jordan, Bug and Nigel all medical examiners? Maybe with different specialties? They are confusing. Also, if Lily is a grief counselor, why does she have to do things like call maintance to fix things and keep Dr. Macy's schedule?)

Is bon bon around? Pat Kiernan profile.

Oh, Pat!

It would be nice if candidate after candidate is rejected until say 2009. And did everyone like that beautiful sunrise view of the pyramids?