October 27th, 2005
Harriet Miers withdraws her nomination to Supreme Court
Wow… did she finally figure out she wasn’t qualified to sit on the highest court in the nation? Kudos to the Senators, both Democrat AND Republican for answering some tough questions and taking this way more seriously than our Commander in Thief does.
Yeah, yeah… sorry…. I’m in a political mood. Let’s have a hat trick today and see some indictments, yeah? That’d be a wicked political day! 
October 27th, 2005 at 11:26 am
I was really pleased to see Meirs withdraw herself. It’s kind of a “fuck you” to the President, if you think about it.
“I’m sorry, sir. But even *I* have to admit your faith in me is misplaced.”
But they’re good friends, so I’m sure all is forgiven.
God, I hate Bush. His whole defense for nominating Meirs was essentially, “She’s a good person. Trust me!”
I’m sorry. Didn’t your administration just take a serious blow upside the head after you appointed your buddy Michael Brown as the head of F.E.M.A. and he was too inept to respond properly? Moron.
October 27th, 2005 at 1:11 pm
Politics and anger make me so friggin tired.
But its a good thing that we have something to piss and moan about.
Maybe they’ll impeach him! That hasn’t happened since…oh sorry. Thats probably a sore issue.
*sits down and reads a book
October 27th, 2005 at 1:14 pm
What scares me is what he’ll come up with next.
October 27th, 2005 at 2:04 pm
As great as it is to see the president get smacked down, it is really a bad thing that she withdrew.
The reason it is bad is because she was really somewhat of a moderate. The radical right has smacked her around so hard because they were not sure that she would vote the way they want. The right talks like they want someone with an open mind and who will not “legislate from the bench”, but that is really what they DO want.
They know that there is no way to get a overturn of Roe v. Wade through the congress, because polls show that it has over 65% approval toward keeping it. So they are looking to get the president to put someone into office that will overturn it from the bench and also will rule the way they want when it comes to prayer in school and such.
October 27th, 2005 at 3:20 pm
I don’t think that the GOP could stand to have another screw-up like this. Bush has burned up through so much of their political capital in his presidency that it’s really driving a lot of conservatives into the more moderate territory. A couple of years ago it was the “Big Tent” party. How often do you hear from pro-choice republicans nowadays? how about the Log Cabin republicans (the gay conservative group for those not in the know) for that matter? If the idea was to take a the conservative party and make it hyperconservative, thus shifting the political balance to the right, then they’ve been doing a shitty job of it. I thought these guys were supposed to be the cold, unfeeling ones that were actually decent at running a government? (as opposed to the warm and fuzzy touchy feely can’t run shit side across the aisle.)
I give up. I’m voting for Nader next time, just to see what he does. It’ll be fun. You think the Daily show is funny now, then you ain’t seen nothing yet.
(wow, that was like my most generally offensive thing that I’ve written to date!)
October 27th, 2005 at 3:34 pm
see, i can’t really side with either camp since i’m an avowed anarchist; however, i will say that Mister Bush has really sullied my opinion of himself as a MAN. once i lose that confidence in someone - that they are masters of a particular sort of decency and honour - there’s very little they can do to regain my trust, and next to nothing they can do to regain any admiration i may have had. i understand that people are fallible and imperfect, but many recent episodes have shaken any faith i might’ve had in him as a person right down to the ground.
this says nothing about leadership. i think those that choose to follow him could choose worse “leaders;” it’s the folks like we have here in DJ’s readership (for the most part, excluding some very few asshats who just don’t get it and whom we largely ignore anyway) who have no *need* for leaders which suffer for the general incompetence of those who would take up that mantle.
when it comes down to it, if the largess of humanity was really ready to take personal responsibility for its actions, we could obviate “government” altogether. sadly, there is no cause to believe this will happen in any of our collective lifetimes; we will always have governments to impose the will of the few onto the lives of the many. people will be continually born as vassals to rather than dominars of their own fates.
October 27th, 2005 at 4:11 pm
SON OF A BITCH! GAH!
Normally, I would be happy about Bush not getting his way for once, but I was writing a fucking research paper on how she’s the worst possible candidate, and 4 days away from the rough draft due date, she fucking withdraws her nomination! FUCK! Now I have to write an entirely new paper!
October 27th, 2005 at 4:22 pm
She’s still a terrible candidate. I would think her withdrawl would only serve to prove your thesis.
October 27th, 2005 at 4:23 pm
Yeah, but now it’s a moot point!
October 27th, 2005 at 4:58 pm
The last time a group of people started calling out a president for being a bad “man” we got no end of guff about it.
But when Bush is a bad “man” its ok to say so?
Ok.
October 27th, 2005 at 5:06 pm
Man. I was sort of looking forward to Miers’ nomination.
Imagine an incompetent judge who donated to Gore’s campaign back in 1988 as part of Bush’s presidential legacy. She was about as moderate a nominee as we could have hoped for from Bush - the next nominee will likely be a competent douchebag.
October 27th, 2005 at 7:20 pm
To this day, I’m still convinced that the only way that bush won his second term, is because he had the voting machines rigged.
October 27th, 2005 at 11:20 pm
Heres my evidense that those voting machines were rigged.
http://politicalhumor.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?zi=1/XJ&sdn=politicalhumor&zu=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.boomchicago.nl%2FSection%2FVideos%2FBoomChicagoVotingMachine
October 28th, 2005 at 2:04 am
Somehow, I really wouldn’t be surprised if something similar did in fact occur
October 28th, 2005 at 2:12 am
When I went to vote there wern’t even boxes to vote for John Kerry.
October 28th, 2005 at 4:32 am
Wow.. Sorta Liberal heaven in here…
As far as Bush is concerned, let’s get something straight.. He may be a republican, but he’s a Moderate.. Same as Bill Clinton.. There is very little “political” difference between them.. He is not, and has never been a conservative..
Many true conservatives call him a RINO.. ( republican in name only )
So.. Harriet Maiers was no surprise.. She would have actually been the ideal replacement for O’Conner, she a moderate as well.. The balance of power would not have changed..
Now, you’re gonna get a conservative.. Hard Core conservative.. It will be a bloody battle on Capitol Hill, but it will be done..
My only concerns are, now you’re gonna get what some have expressed fears about.. rejection of Roe v. Wade, Religion in Schools and curriculum, ( Intelligent Design anyone? ) and prison terms for flag burning..
I AM a conservative, but not a fanatic, and some of this shit scares ME…
Nonetheless, expect a conservative SCOTUS for the next 20 - 30 years..
October 28th, 2005 at 12:52 pm
Yea, your right drammach
October 28th, 2005 at 2:32 pm
Honestly, I was kinda worried that all the republicans were gonna be like, “Well, the democrats hate her, so there has to be SOMETHING good about her.” and the democrats were gonna be like, “Well the republicans don’t like her, so there has to be SOMETHING good about her…”
Seriously though, this partisan shit gets annoying after a while.
October 28th, 2005 at 2:47 pm
Woah, gear down turbo before things are said that can’t be unsaid. Last time I checked Taking money from social programs for tax refunds and attacking science based on religeous ideals is a fairly conservative thing to do, also overtly attacking countrys is on his list of things done. Hrm, I think that covers all three types of conservatives, financial, fundimentalist, and warhawkery. The three bs, bombs, bibles and bling. What, exactly, makes him moderate?
October 28th, 2005 at 9:29 pm
I think he’s referring to real conservatism, as opposed to the religious/neocon kind of conservative.
There are three main points of real conservatism. Smaller and less controlling government, lower taxes and spending, and social conservatism. Unfortunately, the republican party no longer stands for real conservatism, as they spend just as much if not more than any democrat ever could dream of, their laws extend to ridiculous lengths to interfere with our lives (small government my ass), and all they have left is the ’social conservative’ side, which has been replaced with ‘religious conservative’ over the last 20 years or so. (which is what causes the ridiculous laws that interfere with our personal lives. It’s all a big cycle.)
The only ‘conservative’ thing Bush really is is a religious conservative. He’s hosed more money down the drain than any democrat’s wildest dreams, and the government has only gotten more bloated since he took office. The only thing ‘conservative’ in his viewpoints is his religious conservatism.
Which is why those of us sane enough to realize that if there is a god, he’s probably NOT talking to us and telling us to stone gays and drop bombs on foreign countries want him out of office.
August 3rd, 2007 at 6:31 pm
Hey
I was surfing the web and i saw this site, pretty cool.
Currently im running and adult site:Reachton
k, just want to say hi
Can i link you from my site? im looking for quality content like yours. If no let me know if i can add u in exchange for a montly fee or something.
August 5th, 2007 at 12:29 pm
Hey
I was surfing the web and i saw this site, pretty cool.
Currently im running and adult site:Reachton
k, just want to say hi
Can i link you from my site? im looking for quality content like yours. If no let me know if i can add u in exchange for a montly fee or something.