Why rubber-stamping Shrub's nominees is the right thing to do

[jmowreader]

Read "non-judicial nominees." Judges we need to fight as hard as we can, because they don't leave when Shrub does.

I haven't drunk the kool-aid, joined the Republican Party or any of those other right-leaning things. Nor have I been mugged recently. Don't worry, I'm still a leftist.

It's good that we're rubber-stamping Shrub's nominees for one critical reason everyone here seems to be ignoring: Karl Rove, who has a list of real assholes for every position if the Evil Liberal Senate (that contains 55 of his people, but it's liberal as hell) and the Evil Liberal Media (don't ask) should shoot down one of Shrub's precious selectees.

The people Bush has put up for confirmation have uniformly been bad people, but they're nowhere near as bad as the people he COULD put up if given the opportunity.

Secretary of State? There's no reason Bush couldn't select Oliver North to be Secretary of State, and given North's rockstar appeal to the radical right he'd be a shoo-in. At Justice? If Gonzales is too evil for you, here's G. Gordon Liddy.

The fuckhead you know is always better than the fuckhead you don't, and there are literally thousands of genuine Nazis in the Republican Party to choose from. Given the choice of Condi, Ollie or Paul Wolfowitz as SecState, I gotta take Condi. Wolfowitz has no moral compass at all and I bet he can't even play the piano. And North? Uhh...we already know he's a felon.

[tjdee]

1. Doesn't matter, we're the minority.

So honestly, they should be voting as they really feel, since it doesn't matter anyhow.

If they didn't confirm Condi, Bush would have found another fuckhead that would have been confirmed.

This precious "ooh, we're playing along" is dumber now than ever before.

[Ian David]

3. What if we just refused to attend the confirmation hearings and votes?

Just walked out of the chambers and said, "You do what you want. We want no part in it."

[Demit]

2. Can you point me to a link that shows North and Liddy were considered?

[jmowreader]

16. I used a small exercise to pick those two names

The exercise is called "what's your worst nightmare?" and is executed by thinking of the last fucking person in the world one might wish to see returned to civil service.

Who do you come up with? North, Poindexter, Negroponte...oops, Negroponte's already been chosen.

No one in their right mind would ever seriously consider giving Oliver North a job in the government, not even dogcatcher...but since Bush is in office, who in hell knows what we're gonna see in the next 47 months.

[flpoljunkie]

Rolling over is for trained seals, not the opposition party. The Senate

Democrats, in their opposition to Condi Rice and Alberto Gonzales, are saying to the world that some of us do not condone elevating those who have lied this nation to an unnecessary and unwinnable war.

[DistressedAmerican]

4. Totally disagree!

I argued just the opposite here:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x1536084

AND here:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x1536084

We must fight these fools every chance we get on the land, on the sea and in the air. If we shot one down and they sent up someone worse, we'd shoot them down too. I will not accept the Neocon/Falwell revolution on any terms. Appeasing tyrants does not work! Fight! Fight! Fight!

Start by Filibustering Alberto Gonzalez. They should have stopped Ashcroft and didn't. We got that asshole for 4 years. I am not willing to go there again.

DA
http://www.seedsofdoubt.com/distressedamerican.main.htm

[flpoljunkie]

5. Dupe.

[demnan]

6. Well the thing is to keep voting against the idiots

I have a real problem with Gonzales, as much as Condi, and I hope the Senate Democrats will earn their paycheck by denying bad candidates. The more they object, the more unfavorable press has to come out about these creeps. Little by little, people will start to wake up - just like they did about Watergate.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

7. North, Liddy could NEVER be put up for AG they have NO law degrees

[txaslftist]

18. And Liddy is a convicted felon, by the by.

[CWebster]

8. Ridiculous logic

The damage is of no one opposing so much every step of the way.

Yeah, that's really sending a message of a clear and principled choice to the voters.

I can't believe the indifference some demonstrate regarding this. If anything, it was a symbolic opposition to the Bush cabal and every time you dismiss it as nothing, you dis the Senators who were willing to make a stand because it has meaning.

It HAS meaning.

[leesa]

9. This doesn't make any sense. Why does voting against these nominees

make it impossible to also vote against the bad judicial nominees?? You're afraid they will be accused of partisanship? I have a flash for you, they will be accused of it anyway.

What is CRITICAL is that they display to the country and to the world that lying to us and to the Congress is not acceptable.

[DistressedAmerican]

10. Hear Hear!

That's just what I was arguing on this thread:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x1536084

We do not have a limited stash of ammo. Logic is that we gain political capital by risking it in just these types of battles. If you do not invest it, it dwindles to nothing.

I for one would like to see some candidates rally their base rather than pandering these these lying immoral warmongers. Who's elected reps are they anyway? Go on record with a vote or go, I say!

[rucky]

11. I see your point, but that's not how you deal with bullies.

It's exhausting, but you have to fight them every step of the way, and always talk about the heart of the matter instead of the crap they throw at you.

[CWebster]

13. It actually isn't really that difficult

Reid was concise, brief, direct, but he handed it to them on a platter.

[rucky]

14. That was beautiful. And for my own sanity, if nothing else...

I need to hear stuff like that from our leaders.

[sellitman]

12. That's the same as saying

Jail the murderer...not the rapist. You have to jail BOTH...they both are criminals. The degree doesn't matter. It's the principle. Your argument to so full of holes I won't even continue.

:crazy:

[Horushawk]

15. Dems should vote down anybody shrub sends up

:nuke: :kick:

[txaslftist]

17. We have a chance of beating one...

Gonzales. Will the Republicans lockstep vote to affirm him?

I'm not sure. Will the dems uniformly oppose? I hope so.

He's all around bad news.

If we have a shot at beating him, we need to.

There is no such thing as "reserving energy" for the "tough fights" on judicial nominees. I never heard such nonsense as this DLC silliness.

The reality is that politics is about creating energy, not reserving it. Momentum is built by creating issues and making folks listen. If we can beat Gonzales, -I really believe there is a chance, given his track record- the judicial nominees will not be Gonzales clones.

Politics pays attention to rising forces that grow, not fading forces that die. This is a critical mistake our -inside the beltway- leaders have been making, the idea that there is something left of the good old Tom Foley/Tip O'Neill days to hold onto, some power left to squeeze out of the 'good ol' dem machine'.

The reality is that the democrats will gain power through taking principled, public stands directly in opposition to the madness of the republicans. Americans appreciate a fighter more than they appreciate a 'cooperater' (or collaborator).

FIGHT, DEMS, FIGHT!