Michael Mukasey is Probably the Best We Could Hope for From Bush.

[David Zephyr]

Folks, we need to learn a little about perspective and about choosing which battles to fight. I am speaking about Bush's nominee to replace Alberto Gonzales at the Justice Department. I am not thrilled with Michael Mukasey, but let's face it, it could be a lot worse.

Everyone on the Left went crazy when Laura Bush got George Bush to nominate Harriett Miers to the Supreme Court. At that time, I felt that all things considered, she was probably the best we could ever get from a Bush Administration. Miers had been supportive in the past of a woman's right to choose and other progressive programs and matters of law. And while her record was foggy, no one can possibly with a straight face tell me that she would have been a worse replacement for Sandra Day O'Connor than MAN, Sam Alito, that Bush replaced Miers with. We are stuck with him for the rest of our lives. And that's something to contemplate before protesting Bush's nominee to be Attorney General.

There isn't a single Democrat in Congress who gave Alberto Gonzales more grief than did New York Senator Chuck Schumer. No one.

Does anyone, who is operating in the world of reality, believe for one second that George W. Bush is not going to nominate anyone who disagrees with him publicly about his use of illegal torture? The fact that Mukasey has shown his distaste for water-boarding without embarrassing the president is why, I believe, that Senator Schumer is supporting him.

If our left-wing protesting of Mukasey's nomination gives enough time for those on the Right to find flaws with him (as it did in the case of Miers), then shame on us, because the next nominee will not be one suggested by Democrats. Take that to the bank.

Sorry, flame away with false arguments and petty insults that I am being "soft on torture" or "weak on civil liberties" in saying this is the best that we can hope for from this wicked man in the White House. But, all things considered, should Mukasey be stopped, I promise you that Bush's next nominee will you have you pine for Mukasey.

Chuck Schumer has my trust in this. Am I crazy about it? No. But, I'll stand with Chuck.

[Richardo]

1. Recommended

and: :applause:

Thanks for a breath of sanity (even though I disagree on Miers). Now don the flame suit. :patriot:

[David Zephyr]

30. Thank you, Richardo.

I know that there will be hasty, hot posts that will misrepresent what I have said, but I felt it needed to be said.

American would be better today with Harriet Miers on the Supreme Court in place of Sam Alito. The opposition from the Left against Miers gave the Right Wing enough time to organize against her. This may happen again now with Mukasey who has indicated his "goal" is to shut down GITMO and who has said that he finds water-boarding "repugnant". No nominee of Bush could possibly say more.

Thank you for you kind words.

[Bjorn Against]

68. The reason Miers was rejected was not "opposition from the left"...

She was rejected because of opposition from the right. The fundies did not like her, and they were the ones who defeated her nomination. You are comparing apples and oranges. Sure the left was by no means thrilled by Miers, but that does not mean they were her primary opponents.

[David Zephyr]

75. Almost correct.

Bickering over Harriet Miers began with our side BEFORE the right wing came in against her. This is precisely my point: If we screw around with a moderate nominee who was recommended to Bush by Democrats, by the way, and let the right wing see the many liberal positions that this nominee has taken in his life, the same thing can happen again.

The title of my thread is not an endorsement of this man, it says that this is probably the best we can expect from GW Bush. The corollary is that we can also expect a hell of a lot worse should the right wing scrutinize him while we are bickering.

[Bjorn Against]

77. No almost about it, the right wing was against the nomination from day one.

See post 70, I gave you several links to prominent right-wing columnists criticizing the nomination in columns which were released within 24 hours of the time that the nomination was made. There was opposition from both sides from the very beginning, you can not possibly claim that the right-wing did not oppose her right away because if you look at the articles that came out immediately after her nomination it becomes clear that you are wrong. The right-wing was very quick in opposing her.

[The Count]

2. Gitmo is the best you can hope from Bush. You don't give in to bullies. Period.

They'll always take more.

[robinlynne]

12. exactly. We cannot sign off on this man or any other for AG who will not agree that

the president must abide by the law.

[David Zephyr]

23. Mukasey offered the "goal" of shutting down Guantanamo which both Cheney & Gonzales opposed.

Even here, on the issue that you present, GITMO, Mukasey has said his "goal" would be to shut it down in clear contradiction to the expressed views of Vice President Cheney and the former Attorney General, Alberto Gonzales.

[rhett o rick]

60. Of course he would say it is his "goal", It is BushCorps "goal" to end the war. nm

[David Zephyr]

64. Come on. Cheney and Gonzales both are on the record as wanting it open.

Any impartial observer can distinguish the differences between these positions regarding GITMO.

Do you really think that Patrick Leahy and Chuck Schumer support torture?

[rhett o rick]

71. My point is that it is easy to say it's your "goal". It's called rhetoric. And I wish to believe

that Schumer doesn't believe in torture, but why he would choose to support Mukasey when his colleagues won't, upsets me.

Mr. Zephyr, I appreciate your polite responses to my questions and I hope you don't think I am picking on you. I am extremely tired of Democrats caving in to the horrible republicans. And I think it is time, past time, to draw the line and fight back with everything we have. And that means to oppose each and every nominee, each and every bill, etc.

[Basileus Basileon]

3. I am profoundly disappointed in Mukasey. I want the Democrats to

fight him tooth and nail, and to reject any nominee who does not believe waterboarding is torture. But that isn't going to happen. Bush is simply going to not nominate anyone else, and then maybe use a recess appointment or some such later. Better we spend the time and capital on something both valuable and viable.

K&R.

(I'm up in the air about Miers. There's a limit to the level of incompetence I feel comfortable with putting on the Supreme Court.)

[walldude]

4. What you say may be true

but it's no reason to make it easy for them. Why keep caving in? Stand up and fight. Make him nominate 10 fucking people or 100. They are stealing the country, at least we could put up a fight.

[Vincardog]

5. The best we can hope for is not good enough. We have to DEMAND that the AG

believes everyone is liable to the rule of law.

[rhett o rick]

18. Well said. nm

[Stop Cornyn]

6. Have you completely given up hope that we'll at least get a reach around?

[NightWatcher]

7. just shred a little of the Constitution, Chuck

standing by while you know that they are shreding the constitution is the same as feeding it into the shredder yourself

[HereSince1628]

8. Please, Don't feed me bitter ointment.

Especially the kind that has absolutely no medicinal value.

Congress is compromised by something about which we have no clue. I expect to go the crematorium before I ever find out what it was.

[Lerkfish]

9. even the best person can be wrong

and this is decidely wrong.

[David Zephyr]

28. So you prefer Sam Alito on the Supreme Court to Harriet Miers?

Contemplate that.

[Lerkfish]

41. yeah, that's exactly what I'm saying, precisely that very exact thing

:eyes:

so you prefer George Bush to Kucinich?

what, you never said that? imagine that.

[David Zephyr]

52. Apology.

My sarcasm was not called for and you are clearly in the majority here. I really do believe that this is a nominee for that important position who will not permit political prosecutions, who has a clear distaste for "water-boarding" and has said everything that he can without having his nomination being pulled by Bush as is what happened with Miers. I apologize for my out of place sarcasm.

[Lerkfish]

54. accepted.

my only point was you can like shumer and he can be a good guy and still be wrong.

Also, dipwads like buchanan can be sometimes right.

if you base your belief on what is right by who says it, you're going to be frequently disappointed.

[madfloridian]

10. Go read all of the top recommended post at Kos.

And then get back to me on this issue.

I remember in 2005 when Schumer took "issues" like women's right off the table. Now he appears to be taking more rights off the table.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/11/5/104438/713

[David Zephyr]

13. Don't need to. I read The Nation as a subscriber. They oppose Mukasey.

I am not cheering his nomination as many, not you, are suggesting. I'm saying it's the best we can expect from Bush and that a follow-up nominee will be worse such as in the case of Miers.

[rhett o rick]

21. No one should attack you. But, I am sick and tired of settling for the best we can expect.

If the follow-ups are worse, then vote them down each and every one. Do not give up your principles. Schumer did, DiFi did.

[David Zephyr]

36. I hear you. And I know that my position won't be popular here.

But I am not cheerleading for Mukasey, just saying that if he goes down, the replacement will be worse.

[madfloridian]

73. Those are intelligence folks saying not to vote for him.

It is Larry Johnson's post. Of course you should read it.

[movonne]

11. No torture...Why should we have to have someone who will not

see water boarding as very wrong..this could happen to our soldiers and I don't think they would want that to happen..

[David Zephyr]

15. Having read his transcripts, it's clear to me that he abhors water-boarding.

How much more could Mukasey say and not expect Bush to pull his nomination as he did with Miers.

[Rex]

14. No thanks.

[rhett o rick]

16. Don't agree. "pick our battles"?? I think we should fight BushCorp on every front.

I am so sick of waiting and waiting for the right battle. The war will be over before we start fighting. Maybe Mukasey is the best we can hope for but still not close to good enough. Force Bush to recess appoint or go w/o a AG. It is time to fight partisan politics with partisan politics. I consider that we are in a war to save democracy. On one side you have BushCorp and the tortures and the other side should be Democrats, all Democrats.

Democrats should oppose each and every thing BushCorp wants until he decides to cooperate. Support for Mukasey shows support for BushCorp. Chuck is on the wrong side of this issue.

For the record I didn't flame the poster, but I am sorry but Democrats that vote in favor of Bush are on the wrong side.

[David Zephyr]

20. Then move to Mississippi and work toward buiding the Democratic Party there.

All fronts indeed.

[rhett o rick]

22. I am working my hardest to rebuild the Democratic Party but it needs it

in more places than just Mississippi. The Democratic Party has become the party of "it could be worse".

[David Zephyr]

26. Mississippi was an example of "picking your battles".

You made my point.

[rhett o rick]

59. You lost me in Mississippi somewhere's, my point is it is too late to "pick battles", we must fight

all of the battles. We must hinder this rocket to tyranny at every turn, every bill, every appointment. I am sick to death of the Democrats going along, for what ever the reason.

[spanone]

17. as chuck schumer says, i respectfully disagree.

the democrats have an opportunity to give mr bu$h a lesson in Constitutional law.

torture is immoral and illegal...so i picked my fight and this is it.

[Selatius]

19. Sink Mukasey when he comes to the floor for a vote.

If Bush is going to recess appoint him regardless of what Dems do, then the Dems can use that against Bush by voting him down to send a symbolic message.

[Malikshah]

24. Baring our neck for the slitting is about our best hope.

Stand up--and don't accept anything like Mukasey.

We've yet to have a decent AG under *-- why continue to give up and give in? It only brings more of the same or worse.

[rhett o rick]

25. We need to send the Emperior a strong message that we will not support

any of his half baked, nominees. If he sends worse then we yell louder. Democrats like Schumer need to stop giving in to Bush.
The Democratic confirmation of Mr. "I never heard of water-boarding", would be another in a long line of defeats to the Emperor with no clothes.

[endarkenment]

27. Ah yes and which battle is it we are picking to fight?

By the way, we didn't shoot down Meirs, they did. Our brilliant leadership has avoided a real fight on everything of consequence so far. All they have done is taken your advice and rationalized going along with the transition to fascism by claiming 'heck it could be worse'.

[David Zephyr]

32. BTW

The initial opposition to Miers was from the Left. And it gave the Right enough time to organize against her. The Mukasey nomination has dejavu written all over it again.

[Bjorn Against]

70. Wrong, the right-wing was opposing her from day one

Here is a search of articles with Harriet Miers' name in them from TownHall.com one of the biggest right-wing sites on the internet. Miers was nominated on October 3rd 2005, you will notice there are articles from some big right-wing names expressing displeasure the same day the nomination was made.

http://townhall.com/search.aspx

http://www.townhall.com/columnists/PatrickJBuchanan/2005/10/03/bush_recoils_from_greatness

http://www.townhall.com/columnists/DavidLimbaugh/2005/10/04/disappointed,_but_still_hopeful

http://www.townhall.com/columnists/RichLowry/2005/10/04/promoting_diversity

http://www.townhall.com/columnists/GeorgeWill/2005/10/04/miersnbsp;is_the_wrong_pick

[Disturbed]

35. Why did the Repugs sabotage Ms. Meirs?

Please refresh my memory.

[David Zephyr]

39. She had spoken and written favorably on gay rights, reproductive rights and more.

The initial opposition by our side gave the Right enough time to come out against her later which killed her chances and that led to Alito sitting where he is today.

[Junkdrawer]

29. Gotta be the driest powder in the history of mankind. n/t

[David Zephyr]

38. When Bush nominates a semi-moderate to the AG, maybe we should keep our powder dry.

It was Democrats who gave Mukasey's name to Bush.

[endarkenment]

45. A person unclear if torture is illegal is not a moderate.

Perhaps you meant 'moderate fascist'?

[David Zephyr]

47. I am certain that he finds it "illegal"; he's said it is "repugnant".

And check out the other post here at the DU about the nominee's positions on many other issues which put him squarely at odds with the entire right-wing which is why I bring up the Miers comparison.

[AuntPatsy]

31. I am a bit stunned, I swear that I saw this same post above several days ago but the opt was a

different Dur? Okay, haven't had to put my tin foil hat on in some time, do some get their thoughts from the same sources and copy them to the word at to apear to be almost exact?

[David Zephyr]

34. I'd like to see the post, AuntPatsy as I know I'm pretty much alone on this.

And if you could find the post, I would be most grateful. But rest assured, this post is all "me". I trust Chuck Schumer on this and think he knows somethings we don't.

[AuntPatsy]

40. Honestly I am not being rude and I could probably find it but I don't like doing things like that

do I have to?

[David Zephyr]

43. No.

I was just curious as to what the post was that you suggested I copied since I did nothing of the sort. Still, it would be sort of nice if, at the very least, I could read posthumously what it is that I cut and pasted. And of course, you don't have to find it. No offense taken.

[AuntPatsy]

44. I did a search, it won't go back far enough, goes only to nov 1?

[ProSense]

33. No excuse, Schumer should have rejected the nomination

Feinstein and Schumer should have rejected Mukasey based on this single statement (which makes no sense) by Schumer:

Under this administration, that nominee will certainly never share our views on issues like torture and wiretapping.

Unbelievable in itself because Schumer seems to think the admin is allowed to have a torture policy.

Although Bush said that if Mukasey wasn't confirmed, there would be no AG, he would most likely have recess appointed Mukasey as he did Foxie.

What Feinstein and Schumer did, however, is give Bush cover from making a recess appointment that would obviously continue to show that Bush believes he is above the law and that everyone in his administration condones torture. A recess appointment would spark controversy. Mukasey or even someone like Bork, there is no difference between any of them. They will all uphold Bush/Cheney/Addington's torture policy.

[nadinbrzezinski]

37. John Dean is now part of the left wing? And a crazy whacko commie?

WOW! I am sure that will come as news to him

Is Mr. Fein a lefty whacko commie?

Again that will come as news to him.

Those who ignore torture don't deserve any respect... or to become the next AG of this country.

To paraphrase Dean... it should give you chills

[Richardo]

46. Funny, the OP predicted you'd say that.

And nowhere does he call ANYONE a 'crazy whacko commie'. Including 'Mr. Fein' whoever that is.

He's just trying to have a rational conversation in GD, which is, of course, like talking to a room of rabid ferrets. With a smoke alarm going off.

[nadinbrzezinski]

48. Funny you should find out who these people are

by the way Mr. Fein is quite conservative

He loves the constution though and in case you wonder he served in the Reagan White House.

He also said that the left wing is whaco... code for commies

[Richardo]

49. I still don't see 'whacko' in the OP - code word or not.

Thanks for the info on Mr Fein, and John Dean is one of my favorite people in the world. I respect his opinion above most others. :patriot:

[nadinbrzezinski]

62. That is why it is called CODE

If our left-wing protesting of Mukasey's nomination gives enough time for those on the Right to find flaws with him (as it did in the case of Miers), then shame on us, because the next nominee will not be one suggested by Democrats. Take that to the bank.


LEFT-WING

That is your CODE WORD

[David Zephyr]

74. Get real.

My using left wing was not "code" for communist or whacko or anything other than what I said.

For your information, there are a lot of folks here at the DU who know me personally and know my background. I have been in the trenches of activism since 1967.

And just in case, I am a socialist. Not even "left wing". Check the archives here at the DU from the earliest days in 2001 when DU just began. I was here.

[MrCoffee]

50. Bruce Fein? he was great on Bill Moyers re: impeachment a few months ago

http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/07132007/profile.html

"The founding fathers expected an executive who tried to overreach and expected the executive would be hampered and curtailed by the legislative branch... They have basically renounced — walked away from their responsibility to oversee and check." — Bruce Fein

[MrCoffee]

42. bravo for saying it, David Zephyr

:applause:

[David Zephyr]

66. Thank you. Notice how a few twist my words to an argument I never made?

Fortunately, it's the exception, not the rule. Thanks for your kind words. I saw your fine post on this subject, too.

[NNN0LHI]

51. One question

Did you think Alberto Gonzales was probably the best we could hope for from Bush when he replaced Ashcroft?

Don

[MrCoffee]

57. Gonzales was confrimed by a Repuke-controlled Senate

so the comparison doesn't hold up. Chimpy could have gotten whoever he wanted confirmed in 2005, and that's exactly what he did.


I don't think Mukasey is Chimpy's dream nominee.

[rhett o rick]

63. Comparing Gonzales to Mukasey is like comparing Hitler to Mussolini.

I oppose both.

[David Zephyr]

61. Of course not. I posted against him. His history in Texas was terrible.

And that brings up a good point: Make a comparison of Mukasey vs Gonzales and their histories prior to their nominations.

It was Democrats who gave Bush Mukasey's name. That certainly wasn't the case with Gonzales.

[Hippo_Tron]

53. Different circumstances, we control the judiciary committee now and Bush is a lame duck

Bush has said that if Mukasey is rejected he will just let the acting AG serve for the remainder of his term.

That's fine by me. The acting AG will have less political capital to implement his policies than a confirmed appointee.

[Krashkopf]

55. Could the Democrats Grow JUST ONE Ball, Please.

Bill Maher's response to Schumer's "Mukasey-is-as-good-as-we-could-hope-for-from-Bush" cave-in statement was a classic: "Could the Democrats just grow ONE BALL, please. I am not asking for two. Just ONE!"

Here it is on YouTube: http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=Tqsutnugn2A

[Doctor_J]

56. Fine, then shut down the government

He has said he will begin writing, enacting, and following his own laws. That's probably the best we can hope for too. That doesn't mean we have to take it.

[rhett o rick]

58. Right on. nm

[rhett o rick]

65. So if you trust Chuck on this, you must not trust Leahy, Kennedy, Biden, Kohl, Feingold,

Durbin, Cardin, and Whitehouse.

[Bjorn Against]

67. Mukasey refuses to say that an obvious crime is a crime...

His job as attorney general is to enforce the law, and anyone who refuses to enforce the law against his own buddies should not be Attorney General.

And frankly, if this is the best Bush will give us then he does not deserve to have anyone confirmed. The Democrats have to put their foot down and say "we will not approve anyone who will allow Bush to commit criminal acts." If Bush doesn't send anyone forward who admits torture and warrantless wiretapping then Congress is under no obligation to approve anyone. There are certain minimal standards that must be met and Mukasey does not meet those standards.

[Individualist]

69. You're trying to defend the indefensible.

Can't be done!

[Mike Nelson]

72. Good point, BUT...

I would still oppose him; and, if he is blocked due to his position on torture, Bush needs to send someone with a different position. Bush should be opposed and opposed AND OPPOSED. Actually, Congress should arrest him! And, I don't think the "right" were going to allow Harriet Miers. Mr. Alito should have been opposed, by the way, with vigor. They should take George W. Bush to the mat. They need to be VERY TOUGH on this lawbreaker.

[DCKit]

76. K&R for the OP as well as the intelligent and (mostly) polite discourse.

An example to all DU of what we SHOULD be doing.

Fight nice kids.

[MzNov]

78. If Chuck Schumer recommended Mukasey in the first place,

Chuck Schumer or another top Dem could have recommended someone ELSE, after the Mukasey hearings. After Mukasey showed the Judiciary Committee that he was not the right candidate for the job.

I don't think you should be flamed by anyone for your opinion, a thoughtful one. But Bush rarely makes any decisions for himself. We could have REJECTED MUKASEY. Schumer (or whoever) could have suggested another candidate. I can't tell you specific names, but then again, I've never heard of Mukasey before this either.

I just can't buy the Schumer/Feinstein spin that Bush would have just come up with some other candidate all by his little brainless self. He might have listened to another suggestion. Just sayin.

Who really knows anyway?

:eyes: