While on the one hand, I understand that 1) these nominations are incredibly significant, and 2) that the Democrats are within their rights to do what they are doing (in terms of the rules), on the other hand the President has the right to nominate whomever he wishes, and the Republicans are in the majority. Further, if this is to the new standard, i.e., that 60 votes is needed to confirm a judge, then this represents a substantial alteration in the process–one that over time may come back to bite the Democrats.
Senate Democrats said Tuesday that they will block the judicial nomination of Priscilla Owen, marking the second time this year they’ve employed filibuster tactics to thwart President Bush’s efforts to name conservatives to the federal bench.
Further, the rationale behind these moves flies in the face of what one of the Democratic front-runners (Kerry) has stated publicly–which is that he would have a test for nominees: they would have to be pro-choice. Surely establishing that clear-cut a standard violates the spirit of the current push by Senate Democrats for “moderates” who won’t use “personal views” in their adjudicating.
No, the Saudis regime has problems far more endemic and difficult than the presence of a US military base. The traditionalistic authoritarian nature of their government is one such problem. Another is, that despite their oil wealth, there has been precious little effort at using that wealth to modernize the society. Their aren’t sufficient jobs, and the human rights record of the regime is atrocious. Not to mention that a remarkably high percentage of students go to college to study “Islamic Studies”–which is problematic for building a vibrant economy. I am not criticizing Islam, but the situation is Saudi Arabia would be analogous to a large percentage of US students going to the Baptist seminary, or majoring in philosophy–what are they all going to do when they gradaute? And more fundamentally, where do the doctors, lawyers, engineers, teachers, mechanics, etc. come from?
This is not a recipe for long-term success, US bases or no US bases.
“We do not ignore the sufferings of the Jews throughout history. And in exchange, we hope the Israelis will not turn their backs on the sufferings of the Palestinians.”
MAHMOUD ABBAS, Palestinian prime minister.
Sources said the individual is a member of a group operating in western Baghdad under the leadership of Abu Musab al Zarqawi, a Jordanian believed by the United States to have been the mastermind behind the assassination of American diplomat Lawrence Foley in Amman last October.
I would link directly to my “induction ceremony” but Possumblog is a blog*spot site, and, hence, the permalinks ain’t workin’. Of course, as James at OTB likes to say, Blogspot is the AOL of Blogging–and I can make fun, cuz the original PoliBlog was a blog*spot site).
If anything, I pleased to in an Axis of something, as long as it has nothing to do with weasels.
Well, not all of the reponse to my most recent column has been negative. I have been invited to appear on a Birmingham radio show tomorrow night to discuss it. If you are in the Birmingham, Alabama area, you can hear me live on 101.1 FM, WYDE (“The Source”) on Lee Davis’ radio show sometime after 7:30pm. (It is the same station that airs the Triple A Birmingham Baron’s baseball games–this is problem the closest I will ever get to meeting Michael Jordan
Randy Barnett, in NRO, has an amusing suggestion: if the Dems in the Senate want to continue holding up Bush’s judicial nominations, then the President should use recess appointment to place the likes of Robert Bork on the bench. Like an issue of Marvel Comic’s old “What If?” series, this would be great fun, but ain’t gonna happen.
Aside from the amusing intro, the article itself has some useful and intriguing info:
Saddam Hussein has gone from hero to zero among Palestinians angry that the man they deemed their only true Arab champion was removed so easily by the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq.
“It has become clear that we all were deceived by Saddam’s words,” said Gaza taxi driver Ahmad Yahya. “Where is Saddam now? Why did the Iraqis not fight (more)? It is a shame!”
For Palestinians, the Iraqi president was the sole Arab leader to offer more than rhetoric against the United States and its perceived pro-Israel bias in their long conflict with the Jewish state over its grip on the West Bank and Gaza Strip.
Saddam’s disappearance and the impression that his army put up little fight against U.S.-led forces, making a mockery of his vows of heroic resistance, plunged many Palestinians into dismay and confusion.
Most of the 3.5 million Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, the two territories they seek for an independent state, as well as millions of refugees abroad saw Saddam as “the symbol of Arab honor” and the “hero leader.”
Of course, the fact that Saddam was the best that they could do for a hero does underscore their downtrodden status (not to mention the utter failure of Palestinian leadership to, well, lead). Although it also bolstered the argument that I have been making that perceptions of power are important.
I was reviewing my referrals and noted that someone found PoliBlog with the search string “nude Russians”–somehow a combo of a reference to the Dixie Chicks ET cover and to Russia vis-a-vis Iraq brought someone over to the blog. My guess is that he was rather disappointed when he got here.
