So much to say

I have so much to say about world events, but so little fit for blog posts. I can't help but be informed (it is, after all, my job) but if I were to tell you what I were informed about, I'd have to kill you. Or at least give you a good dutch rub.

So, alas, I'll have to confine my discussion to mostly domestic events.

As I'm sure most of you in my particular blogular orbit know, President Bush has nominated Harriet Miers to replace Sandra Day O'Connor on the nation's high court. She's an administration insider with no record on any issues important to anyone. She doesn't fit the established model of a potential supreme court justice, and she's not terribly charismatic - a fact that means she's unlikely to be able to wiggle past hotbutton issues with the ease Roberts was able to. (Of course, these issues shouldn't even be part of the discussion, as the bench is not supposed to be a teeny-tiny legislature, but good fucking luck making that argument post Roe v. Wade.) Instead, she will fileted by ranking Democrats on the judicial committee, subjected to barely veiled (and likely false) slurs by the liberal elite, and ultimately rejected for the post, despite the fact that she apparently has a vagina, something that Americans, inexplicably, think is important in the person chosen to replace O'Connor.

This has already been characterized as a political fumble by the charicature of the president a great many people routinely see, rather than the real man. If, indeed, he had not repeatedly proven to be an extraordinarily nimble politician, I might agree. Nonetheless, this slack-jawed charicature is only a charicature, and there is a method behind Mr. Bush's apparent madness.

As the media has already forgotten in its rush to condemn Ms. Miers, they predicted that Mr. Roberts would be a sacrifical lamb, a controversial candidate to be sacrificed to the ravenous opposition. Surprisingly, there was almost nothing controversial about Roberts. In fact, the opposition to his appointment seemed to spring largely from a suspicion that the man had not had an abortion, himself. Anatomical improbabilities aside, I think the liberal media probably got that one right. Regardless, what the media expected to find in Roberts, they now have in Miers.

Democratic Senators can hardly afford not to oppose Miers with so many promises to that effect already on the books, a feat that they shouldn't find difficult. They will loose their anger upon this poor woman, and she will likely wither under the assault. But what then?

Another nominee will come - a nominee I'd expect to be closer to Mr. Bush's personal ideology than Roberts, but still less obviously offensive than Miers. Having already delayed the judicial process, will the left side of the aisle be able to maintain the assault? Or will they have to concede in order to avoid the stigma of being simply obstructionist, an allegation that helped cost former Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle his coveted seat just a year ago?

Now, let's wait and see.