The Lunch Counter
Belly up to the counter. Politics are on the menu. On the grill: Ross

 



Subscribe to "The Lunch Counter" in Radio UserLand.

Click to see the XML version of this web page.

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.

 

 

  Wednesday, October 12, 2005


The Democrat battle lines have been drawn now, between Sen. Hillary (the centrist, act I) Clinton and Sen. John Kerry, representing the George Soros 527's wing of the Democrat party, and promoted by Sen. Edward Kennedy.   I can't imagine either potential candidate succumbing to the other.  This is going to be some Democrat primary season, when it comes. 

Kennedy Supports Kerry Over Hillary for 2008 Election. Sen. Edward Kennedy would support Sen. John Kerry if he runs again in the 2008 election over possible contender Sen. Hillary Clinton. By foxnewsonline@foxnews.com. [FOXNews.com - Politics]


4:25:21 PM    comment [] trackback []




Ever since President Bush named Harriet Miers as his nominee to the SCOTUS, like a lot of conservatives, I too was surprised. I fully expected Janice Rogers Brown or another well qualified well-known candidate to be picked. I quickly was getting flashbacks of jump'n Jim Jeffords. Flashbacks to the final day of putting an end to the judicial nominee filibuster as a tactic, only to see it cave in to an elite club of 14.

It seemed to me that the good candidates were ignored and any speculation about why they weren't picked was not comforting either. A choice made from weakness, or perceived weakness as Rush Limbaugh opined seemed to me to be an accurate assessment. Weakness from the standpoint of not being able to get a headliner choice confirmed. A majority of 5 isn't enough to insure a win on important matters. That's when the RINOs reveal themselves. Republicans need a majority of at least 8 to govern with some confidence, unless and until the RINOs get replaced in office. On the other hand, what appears to some to be weakness could also be interpreted as a move by someone who would rather unite than divide.

Though I expected a strong, known quality choice, I did entrust President Bush to make that choice when I voted for him. And I have to trust his choice. The criticism from the vocal right reminds me of the vocal left. There is the same arrogance about who Bush should have chosen, about how he (in their minds) betrayed them. Same song from the moveon.org wing of the Democrat party. They want, make that demand, that the old skool Democrats step aside and let them take over.

Why trust Bush's judgement? His track record in picking personnel is pretty good IMHO, and, I don't think that he would sell out his party or his country by putting up a nominee to the Supreme Court who would legislate from the bench.  Keep in mind, only Bush and those involved know who was asked and who may have declined the offer.  All we know is who his (final) choice is.

Meanwhile, let's not get wrapped around the axle by pounding our chests and carping on the President. Let the process proceed and stop acting like the rabid left.


1:45:24 AM    comment [] trackback []





Click here to visit the Radio UserLand website. © Copyright 2005 Ross Calloway.
Last update: 11/27/2005; 8:44:04 PM.

October 2005
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
            1
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15
16 17 18 19 20 21 22
23 24 25 26 27 28 29
30 31          
Sep   Nov


The American Red Cross