corrente

I've nearly given up on trying to understand how logic informs anything said or done by these people we have allowed to infest our government, most especially the so-called "opposition party". First, they evidently think we have so many Franklin Roosevelts currently at loose that getting rid of term limits is simply a capital idea, and that the wisdom of the "people" and the infallibility of our vote-counting system is so great (as evidenced by, say, the last 5 years) that we shouldn't hesitate to let a president serve an open-ended term whenever Diebold, Scaife, and The American Enterprise Institute deem it suitable.

And then there is the question as to how even individuals as brain-damaged as the Dems Mary Landrieu (La.), Joe Lieberman (Conn.), Ben Nelson (Neb.), Bill Nelson (Fla.), Mark Pryor (Ark.) and Ken Salazar (Colo.) could believe, after all we know, that Alberto Gonzales would make a great Supreme Court justice; and how a man who wrote some of the great legal quibbling of our time, that enabled us to become equated with hypocrisy and torture on a global scale, could possibly be considered "a good man" and "a terrific human being".

Based on his track record, this is a man who would most likely pick and choose only the most expedient parts of the Constitution to uphold, and probably after redefining the word "citizen" to apply only to those his masters would prefer. Oddly, the possiblility has put the Reactionary Right's wingnuts on alert, and the grumblings from Outer Slobbovia on Gonzales' lack of street cred have forced the Bushco dog-handlers out into the light to whip them back in line:

"The White House and the Senate Republican leadership are pushing back against pressure from some of their conservative allies about the coming Supreme Court nomination, urging them to stop attacking Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales as a potential nominee and to tone down their talk of a culture war.
In a series of conference calls on Tuesday and over the last several days, Republican Senate aides encouraged conservative groups to avoid emphasizing the searing cultural issues that social conservatives see at the heart of the court fight, subjects like abortion, public support for religion and same-sex marriage, participants said.
Instead, these participants, who insisted on anonymity to avoid exclusion from future calls, said the aides - including Barbara Ledeen of the Senate Republican Conference and Eric Ueland, chief of staff to Senator Bill Frist, the majority leader - emphasized themes that had been tested in polls, including a need for a fair and dignified confirmation process.
Mr. Ueland acknowledged that he and others had been working almost since the vacancy occurred last Friday with Justice Sandra Day O'Connor's resignation to persuade conservative activists to steer clear of divisive language.
"Every contact we have with these folks is 'stay on message, stay on purpose,' " Mr. Ueland said. "The extremism of language, if there is to be any, should be demonstrably on the other side. The hysteria and the foaming at the mouth ought to come from the left."

But all this is still speculation, And as for those Dems who might ask troubling questions of the once and future King George during the "advise and consent" consultation specified by said Constitution--such as exactly who he has in mind to nominate--don't trouble your pretty little heads, darlings:

"Consultation is in the eye of the beholder,” said Amy Call, a spokeswoman for Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.), who is traveling in Africa. “The president can choose whatever level of consultation he thinks is appropriate. The Constitution doesn’t lay out any specifics for that. It’s up to the president what he wants to accomplish in this meeting."

See there? What do you know? Just shut up and let the grown-ups handle it. And if that means whatever Georgie wants, Georgie gets, why, I'm sure Gonzales will be able to backtrack through the Constitution and find some obscure clause for mangling that will justify it.