| By gqmartinez - Jul 5th, 2005 at 12:35 pm EDT |
Dreams aside, talk about a war seems like a self fulfilling prophecy. If anything Bush seems to like to do things just to tick off progressives. I don't think we will get a progressive judge and I'm fine with that, that's how our democracy works. Bush campaigned on nominating a conservative judge, sure, but he also campaigned on uniting the country instead of dividing it as today's Progress Report mentions.
Conservatives are holding Bush accountable for campainging on conservative Judges, progressives should hold him accountable for promising not to divide. His decision has the potential to divide the country, but it doesn't have to. Do moderates and independents really want a drawn out battle? I know I don't.
At the heart of the judicial compromise was the commitment to ensure "advice and consent":
We Believe that, under Article II, Section 2, of the United States Constitution, the word "Advice" speaks to consultation between the Senate and the President with regard to the use of the President's power to make nominations. We encourage the Executive Branch of government to consult with member of the Senate, both Democratic and Republican, prior to submitting a judicial nomination to the Senate for consideration.Rather than being so vociferous in our pre-emptive condemnation of Bush, why don't we push for dialogue? We have to face the fact that we won't get who we want, but we can blunt the blow by working together with the President, as hard as that may seem. I'm not convinced that Bush is prepared to waste all of his "political capital" on this decision. Even if he is prepared to do that, progressives should make Bush and the GOP look like the obstrctionists. Gloom and doom preemptive war doesn't help us.
Such a return to the early practice of our government may well serve to reduce the rancor that unfortunately accompanies the advice and consent process in the Senate.

Comments are closed for this post.