Liberal opposition to the appointment of John Roach to Kentucky's Supreme Court was, you have to admit, pretty weak. It was "He's too young and inexperienced" (which he wasn't), then "He's too conservative" which was, after all, the real objection in the first place. And that objection, to the fringe elements making it, just means that Justice Roach is somewhat to the right of Ralph Nader. Not a problem. The upcoming election will be interesting as Roach faces the voters, but the liberal wish that he will be repudiated then is a pretty tall order.
The Nomination Obstruction Left will not go so quietly as President Bush seeks to replace Sandra Day O'Connor. The NOLs will Bork, High Tech Lynch, hog tie, rape and pillage, tar and feather, Abu Ghraib naked photo, and otherwise demean and destroy anyone he puts up. We all know that. A Mushy Middle Coalition of U.S. Senators will meet to put up a liberal jurist. We all know that too. Those of us who voted for President Bush twice in anticipation of conservative appointments to the U.S. Supreme Court are going to have a good time watching this.
Liberal hair-on-fire freakouts have become all too predictable in recent years. This fall will bring us the Mother of All Freakouts. Just as they have sought to destroy the military effort against the terrorists, tax reform, Social Security reform, and Estate Tax reform, the far left can only tear down.
Where do our "conservative" Democrats stand on this?