Now the Game Begins

I know it didn't take a rocket scientist to know that Miers never had a chance but I was predicting her withdrawal way before it was cool to do so.  I think I'm off by one or two seven days.    The part of the story I'm really interested in though is whether the RW Noise Machine and the corporate media will be able to stick this turn of events on the "obstructionist Dems."    That would certainly make it easier for BushCo to send up a lunatic this time around. 

I can hear the screaming already.  "We must not deny any nominee and up or down vote!  Time is of the essence.  The seat must be filled and now that we have a nominee both parties can agree on, there is no reason to delay the confirmation.  American citizens need to know that the Supreme Court is functioning.  They demand justice.  The only people obstructing justice in Washington these days are the Democrats, who refuse to give this nominee an up or down vote."   Expect a three-part series from the Noble Nagourney to run in the NYT exploring the Democrats' policy of obstruction dating back to the  debate over the Department of Homeland Security and continuing with Social Security.  It will be filled with anonymous worries about how that tactic is tearing the party apart and with lots of quotes from Republicans who think that it's a  dangerous course for the Dems to pursue leading up to the midterms.

UPDATE:  So far the NYT is proving me wrong.   After this unsubstantiated paragraph that is: (emph mine)

Ms. Miers has been described by friends and associates as intelligent, principled and discreet to the point of shyness. She was also one of the first women to become a partner of a major Texas law firm and to head the Texas Bar Association. But in the end, those qualities were not enough. With opposition from both Republicans and Democrats, it had become increasingly likely that Ms. Miers, 60, would fail to garner enough votes to be confirmed by the Senate.

UPDATE 2: Looks like the pro-war WaPo is trying the same stunt:

But the nomination of Miers to replace Justice Sandra Day O'Connor was already in deep trouble, with little support in the Senate, open criticism from many senators of both parties and an outpouring of opposition from conservative activists and intellectuals.

Many senators. A plethora of them. I wonder where all these critical Dems are hiding because I'm not finding them quoted in either of these stories or anywhere else over the last three weeks for that matter. The LAT did the best job:

Facing criticism from President Bush's conservative allies and skepticism from Democrats, Harriet E. Miers, the White House counsel, withdrew her nomination to be an associate justice on the Supreme Court, the White House announced this morning.

Skepticism is, of course, the quality with which all senators should great every nominee.

Comments

[Dee]

Don't know what to think of no Harriet. I think that I am more afraid of the alternative. Wouldn't be suprised if they put the most conservative whack job out there! Did like to see the GOP in-fighting... I enjoyed that a LOT! I'm sure the next nominee will provide a "Kum-ba-yah"moment for those guys!

[eRobin]

I'm not sure either. It could be Ownens or Brown - I think it's going to be William Pryor - definitely a big loss for our side (the side that doesn't include Dominionists and wage slavers). I'm about to post why I think so.

[Thomas Nephew]

On the other hand, Miers was in the bag for Bush regarding all her advice to him; I doubt she would have recused herself from any torture/war/other issues before the court.

It will be interesting to see if Bush reaches for another (ex) White House staffer or similar.

Gonzales would a 2d thumb in the eye, supposedly, to the radical clerics. But if reliable defense of executive privilege and misdeeds is the goal, then Roberts was a good pick, and so will the next one be, whether Gonzales, Luttig, Bybee or someone of that ilk.

[eRobin]

C'mon, Thomas - you have pick one. I'm going with Pryor.

I'd be really impressed if it's Abu G. Not because he wouldn't be a disaster but because the ravenous base thinks he'll be a disaster and it'd take some courage on BushCo's part to rile them further.

[Gort]

After such a well qualified nominee as John Roberts he better come up with a good one.

[Thomas Nephew]

OK: Gonzales.

I hope we're both wrong, and both unduly pessimistic.

[eRobin]

I'm sitting here stumped as to how anyone who pays attention to this administration can be unduly pessimistic. But I know what you're saying and I agree.