Miers out for SCOTUS

Gee, Don, do you really think President Rove Bush is that cynical or masterful of a chess player? I think he was just shocked that he didn't have as much political capital as he was crowing about post-election.

Or maybe they recently discovered that Harriet was born Harry...

Or their handlers are.

If this was the case, it was a very dangerous gamble. The confirmation of Michael Brown's imcompetence is right now being very publicly staged. The main, and arguably only, qualification both he and Harriet supposedly hold is abject loyalty to the administration.

Putting forward another obviously unqualified person for an even more important appointment while Congress is in the process of determining the cost in American lives, money and international standing of the last unqualified appointee seems designed to alienate and anger supporters in both Congress and the constituency.

The mantra has always been to never appear weak, at all costs. Literally, at all costs. Her withdrawal made the administration seem weaker than it's appeared in all previous dealings with Congress and the far right. There was a plan here, but something did not go according to plan. I'd love to hear Rove's first thoughts on her nomination.

Also, I'm not sure how much Congressional Republicans can distance themselves from the administration at this point. They've spent 6 years portraying themselves as being in lockstep. I'm going to be very interested in that aspect of the campaigns.

The other party never opposed the woman nomineee - POTUS' party opposed her.

As for anyone else looking good in comparison, Bush does consider himself the master of low expectations (his quote).

Which would make his first thoughts on her nomination even more interesting. Now there's a memo/email that's going to be the subject of a few chapters in political history books. Rove and his stewardship of the president's career have been the glue that melded the groups on the right into such an efficient machine while the left talked about maybe getting together for a playdate sometime.

Will the failed nomination of Harrient Miers be seen as foreshadowing of the consequences of Patrick Fitzgerald's yet to be announced decisions? This is some high drama. If the absence of Rove results in a couple more moves like this without any big successes then the mid-term elections are anyone's game.

I doubt that the Bernanke nomination does fit in with the Miers nomination. They likely came from two completely different teams in the WH. The only thing they have in common is the letterhead.

The SCOTUS vacancy is seen as an ideological opportunity. A lot of people factored this into their votes in 2004. It's an emotional hot button issue to many. The administration has until now been masterful in this milieu. I don't think there was a larger strategic plan here. I think Bush got his hat handed to him and he's now one PO'd POTUS.

The Fed chairmanship is a technical position for someone with a big brain and passable political skills. There's little political risk or opportunity in it. It's also much easier to divine what decisions will have to be made and how the nominee with approach those decisions. Most people also haven't got the foggiest idea what the Fed chairman (or the Fed itself for that matter) does. This was a technocratic decision. There were little to no politics involved.

And it would be totally foolish of the left to try to portray POTUS as a jughead. He's always won when they've tried that. Even if Rove is out, those left standing must have learned how to deal with that.  If they're going to demonize anyone, they'd be smarter to go after Delay and co. Those are the positions up for grabs next anyway.