Barry SCHWARTZ (Barijo ŜVARC) (chemoelectric) wrote,

The Near Future

Jeralyn Merritt wrote:

Saturday :: January 14, 2006

Specter Will Vote For Alito

Senate Judiciary Chair Arlen Specter has announced he will vote to confirm Judge Sam Alito to the Supreme Court. The vote could come as early as Tuesday.

Democrats sound increasingly pessimistic about stopping Bush's drive to pack the court with conservative ideologues.

"To stop a president on judicial nominations, you either need a Democratic president, a Democratic Senate or moderate Republicans who will break ranks when it's a conservative nominee," Mr. Schumer said. "We don't have any of those three. The only tool we have is the filibuster, which is a very difficult tool to use, and with only 45 Democrats, it's harder than it was last term."

He's right. That's why we must begin focusing now on the 2006 elections and 2008.

To which I replied:

If Alito had said he would overturn Roe v. Wade, the Democrats would certainly have filibustered. Thus the Democrats are making crystal clear that they want Bushists to lie and so spare them the bother. They are co-dependents of the 'Republicans' (Bushists).

The Democratic Party should have become the sort of party that leads protests and strikes, even as the Bushists did become that sort of party (witness Florida 2000).

Looking forward to the 2006 election, I see a nuclear attack on Iran followed by or shortly preceded by questionable Bushist 'victories' in both houses. Iran isn't trying to make nuclear weapons just because it seems a cool idea, you know. It's a race against the clock. If we get anything better than the above, I'll count it as a blessing.

I'm purposely being pessimistic here, because at the least this is the sort of thing that Bushist-PNACi (pronounced like Pee-Nazi) leaders would like things to proceed.

The PNACis want to make it clear to the world that dissension from the 'New American Century' may be met with nuclear weapons. They know Russia and China will not launch a counterattack for an aggression against Iran, because the U.S. would engage them in general thermonuclear war.

This is a sort of worst-case scenario; it is what the PNACis would like to do, and could do if they focused on it. In actual life we have Patrick Fitzgerald, Dick Cheney's declining health, George W. Bush's 'mental' illnesses, hurricanes, etc., distracting them.

  • My tweets

    Tue, 12:31: RT @ AngryBlackLady: Why is it the libertarian assholes ALWAY bring up the crack/cocaine sentence disparity w/ me? Like drugs are…

  • My tweets

    Mon, 20:01: @ Floridaline Sort of. I think tomorrow he’s going to meet his first Italian American who doesn’t support Mussolini. :) Mon,…

  • My tweets

    Sun, 15:39: My Kindle seems to like regular web-embedded fonts, though not the Google Web Fonts API. Mon, 08:54: reworked;…

  • Post a new comment


    Anonymous comments are disabled in this journal

    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    Your IP address will be recorded