Bush nominates Brownie to Supreme Court!

Well… he might have nominated the disgraced, former FEMA director, but Mike Brown lacked the one crucial qualification needed for this particular appointment: a vagina. And so in his ongoing quest to fill the government with appointees even less qualified than himself, President Bush has nominated White House Counsel Harriet Miers — a woman with absolutely no judicial experience — to the “girly seat” being vacated by retiring Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor.

Apparently, in the Bush administration, the only prerequisite for appointment to high office is to have none.

Undoubtedly, Bush intended Miers to be a stealth nominee, with no judicial record to trip her up during confirmation hearings. But it’s funny how these things work out, and clearly, Republicans are a helluva lot more pissed off by her nomination than Democrats. Over on Daily Kos the early talk is about a political and judicial win-win for the D’s. One thread describes the upcoming confirmation hearings as “pure gold“, an opportunity to explore Miers’ involvement in a number of White House controversies, from Bush’s service (or lack thereof) in the National Guard, to PlameGate, to the administration’s illegal and immoral use of torture. And Kos himself writes:

Several Democrats, including Reid, have already come out praising Miers, which ultimately will only fuel the right-wing meltdown on the decision.

I reserve the right to change my mind, but Miers’ biggest sin, at this early juncture, is her allegiance to Bush. That her appointment is an act of cronyism is without a doubt, but if that’s the price of admission to another Souter or moderate justice, I’m willing to pay it.

And that “right-wing meltdown” appears well under way. Former White House speechwriter David “Axis of Evil” Frum was so scathing in his comments on his blog at the National Review, that he actually went back and excised the middle paragraph:

Harriet Miers is a taut, nervous, anxious personality. It is impossible to me to imagine that she can endure the anger and abuse – or resist the blandishments – that transformed, say, Anthony Kennedy into the judge he is today.

She rose to her present position by her absolute devotion to George Bush. I mentioned last week that she told me that the president was the most brilliant man she had ever met. To flatter on such a scale a person must either be an unscrupulous dissembler, which Miers most certainly is not, or a natural follower. And natural followers do not belong on the Supreme Court of the United States.

Nor is it safe for the president’s conservative supporters to defer to the president’s judgment and say, “Well, he must know best.” The record shows I fear that the president’s judgment has always been at its worst on personnel matters.

And I couldn’t be more cheered to read that William Kristol, the editor of The Weekly Standard, is “disappointed, depressed and demoralized“…

the president had to be ready to fight on constitutional grounds for a strong nominee. Apparently, he wasn’t. It is very hard to avoid the conclusion that President Bush flinched from a fight on constitutional philosophy. Miers is undoubtedly a decent and competent person. But her selection will unavoidably be judged as reflecting a combination of cronyism and capitulation on the part of the president.

I’m demoralized. What does this say about the next three years of the Bush administration–leaving aside for a moment the future of the Court? Surely this is a pick from weakness. Is the administration more broadly so weak? What are the prospects for a strong Bush second term? What are the prospects for holding solid GOP majorities in Congress in 2006 if conservatives are demoralized? And what elected officials will step forward to begin to lay the groundwork for conservative leadership after Bush?

Where does Miers stand on the issues of the day? Who the hell knows. But, if you really want the nitty-gritty dirt on Miers, Wonkette dishes up the kind of personal profile you aren’t likely to find in the MSM:

  • She is immensely, perhaps irrationally, into birthdays: “She always remembers everybody’s birthday, and has a present for them. She’ll be finding a present for somebody in the middle of the night…. ‘Can’t it wait until next week?’ ‘No,’ she’d say, ‘It has to be done now.'”
  • She has dated Texas Supreme Court Justice Nathan Hecht “over the years.” [NOTE: Absolutely no other article online mentions this fascinating fact.]
  • She’s nit-picky micromanager who failed upwards at the White House: “She failed in Card’s office for two reasons,” the [former White House] official says. “First, because she can’t make a decision, and second, because she can’t delegate, she can’t let anything go. And having failed for those two reasons, they move her to be the counsel for the president, which requires exactly those two talents.”
  • Not even the president can think of much interesting to say about her: In 1996, at an Anti-Defamation League Jurisprudence Award ceremony, Bush introduced Miers as a “pit bull in Size 6 shoes,” a tag line that has persisted through the years, in part because colorful anecdotes or descriptions about Miers are notoriously difficult to find.

We’re not even that excited about her being gay.

I’m guessing we’ll get a lot clearer picture of the nominee over the next few days as Democrats leak the reasons for their early support, and GOP right wingers turn on their own in a cannibalistic fury. This nomination could be fun.


  1. 1

    Puddybud spews:

    Goldy, did you fact check your negative GWB and Miers information before posting it so no mea culpas will be needed later?

  2. 2

    Goldy spews:

    Puddinghead @1,

    Did I fact check? Huh? All I did was report on what others were saying… and I provided links to everything I cited.

  3. 4


    Now, if only Reagan Dunn could be nominated to the Supreme Court?

    At the rate Bush is going, I have to gauge your reaction HA’ers.

  4. 5

    yearight spews:

    OK, here is the plan. (I hope.) Rove nominates Miers so that the dems spend energy tracing no real paper trail and all the other Bush crony dirt. Hopefully the dems will filibuster, Bush will withdraw Miers and appoint a real conservative. (Problem here – the repubs may filibuster instead.)

    We can only hope.

  5. 6

    Mark The Redneck spews:

    I can’t believe I’m saying this… but Goldy, I agree with you. HTF can he nominate someone with no qualifications. Unfuckingbelieveable.

    Has it gotten to the point where judicial nominations are so contentious that someone with no background gets the nod?
    There’s dozens, maybe hundreds of people out there without vaginas who must be pissed that they were passed over. I don’t blame them. Why the fuck even bother.

  6. 7

    righton spews:

    Goldy its your fault. You guys return to normal advice and consent (pre bork method) and we’ll nominate the qualified.

    Turns out avoiding the wrath of Leahy and Schumer leads to bozos on the court (souter and this gal). You gotta know Bush left to his own devices would have nominated smart male judge…

  7. 8

    Bobblehead spews:

    MTR @ 6

    The answer to your question is a resounding YES! Certain issues (Abortion, Church and State, etc) are so contentious between the far right and far left that currently control the parties that if you bring anyone with a paper trail one side or the other will bring out the flamethrowers and slag the country in an attempt to stop them.

    Even Roberts had too much of a paper trail because of his experience as White House counsel under Reagan. Roberts got a mild toasting from the far left because of some of the comments he made in relation to abortion and women’s rights. The only reason it didn’t get any worse is that the comments were made 20 years ago and since then, he has no paper trail at all.

    So now Bush has provided the perfect candidate for SCOTUS. She has absolutely no paper trail except that she’s a Bush crony and the Roberts confirmation has paved the way for refusing to answer any questions about the hot topic issues. She just has to say ‘I will interpret the law based on the constitution and will not allow my personal beliefs to interfere with my legal review.’ or for the really difficult questions, ‘I can not answer that question as it may come before the court and I do not want to pre-prejudice my rulings.’

    All in all, if she makes it to the confirmation hearings, expect more of the 10 minute speech by the congressmen, 5 minutes (if that) for Miers. The funny thing is, based on today’s reaction it’s going to be the far right that scuttles her, not the far left. But then, one must also remember that the day after Roberts was announced the Far Right turned on the flamethrowers for him as well.

  8. 9

    Thomas Trainwinder spews:

    Rove strikes brilliantly again. Can’t vote against her because of record.

    Bush clearly knows where she (and Roberts) stands on the *key* issues to them.

    Rove shows his superior political skills again.

    Right wingers rejoice…you got your anti-abortion lackey in there via Rove ensuring confirmable candidates…

  9. 11

    HELLCAT spews:


  10. 12

    windie spews:

    I like the idea (heard a few places today and yesterday) that she’s there because Bush wants a totally loyal crony in place for when he has to face the court himself~

    I read somewhere that she called him ‘The most brilliant person she’s ever met’ (or something)…. Now THATS loyalty, or maybe love ;)

  11. 14

    windie spews:

    heres the quote, for those interested:

    She is said to be a close personal friend of the President. According to an article in Salon Magazine, October 3, 2005, Miers has called President Bush “the most brilliant man I have ever met.”

    (quoted from the wikipedia entry)

  12. 15

    HELLCAT spews:


  13. 16

    Bobblehead spews:

    Windie @ 12

    Actually, if Bush comes before the court, Miers would have to recuse herself from any involvement in the case. Her personal relationship with Bush would be a conflict of interest. Roberts would probably also have to recuse himself.

  14. 17

    windie spews:


    ohhh thats a good point. Its bad for Bush, however… Shifts the balance AWAY from his favor…

    But is there anything that FORCES a Supreme court justice to recuse themselves if its appropriate? Can’t they just keep going anyways?

  15. 19

    HELLCAT spews:


  16. 20

    ConservativeFirst spews:

    Call me a cynic (but not Mr. Cynical), but she’s a sacrificial lamb. Rove will leak dirt on her right before the hearings, and she’ll step down. Then Bush will nominate his real nominee, but the nation will tired of the months of bickering from the previous two nomination fights and tune out. Or Rove could create another hurricane with his Hurricane-O-Matic to distract the public.

    Roberts replacing Rehnquist was no change in power balance on the court. O’Connor is more moderate but not a big swing to the right, if replaced by a conservative. I think the Dems are saving their most desparate measures in the event Stevens, Ginsburg, Kennedy, or Souter leaves the Court under a Republican President, especially Bush. That would change the balance of power in the Court.

  17. 21

    headless lucy spews:

    I hope we can link Bush and Cheney directly to the outing of Valerie Plame. One former president( Jimmy Carter– the president who founded FEMA) says publicly that the 2000 election was stolen. He has very strong suspicions about Ohio and Florida in 2004. Jimmy Carter says that George Bush is an illegitimite president—and when it is known by all that that is the case, the first thing to go will be his Supreme Court nominees.

  18. 22

    Bobblehead spews:

    Windie @ 17

    Aside from the massive numbers of lawsuits that would suddenly appear if she were to rule on a case involving Bush? I don’t know if it’s a law, but it’s a part of the ethics for being a lawyer/judge (I know, oxymoronic) that would probably lead to her disbarment and subsequent removal from SCOTUS.

  19. 23

    headless lucy spews:

    The Supreme Court acted in a partisan manner in 2000 presidential election, thereby invalidating their decision.

  20. 25

    Nindid spews:

    I would not be so content to rely on conservatives ethics in these matters. Has everyone already forgotten that Scalia saw no ethical problem with going duck hunting with his good buddy Dick Cheney and then turning around and ruling in a case involving him?

    No, Miers would just go ahead and rule… that is unless she is really a stealth nominee and grows some ethics along the way.

  21. 26

    David spews:

    Whatever her ideological leanings, I’m really not comfortable with replacing a woman like O’Connor (I’ve met her, she’s brilliant and sharp as a tack) with a sycophant, a toady like this Harriet Miers. What the heck recommends her to this office (outside of her good buddy George, I mean)?

  22. 27

    Mr. Cynical spews:

    This is why we have hearings…rumors are flushed out.
    I’m sure the Dems will pay much more attention to this nomination than they did to Brown being nominated for FEMA!!
    I love watching the LEFTIST PINHEADS vent, vent and vent…..and then when they are questioned about why they didn’t raise all of Brown’s OBVIOUS unqualifications, they STF up for a little while….hoping people forgot that the LEFTIST PINHEADS are culpable for Brown too.

    I don’t think their is any vast conspiracy from the Right or Left on this nomination. You folks can speculate, rumor-monger and waste your time…..I’f prefer to wait and see what the hearings flush out.
    Jeez—I sound like the voice of reason!!!! Scarey!

  23. 28

    David spews:

    MTR @ 6 (“There’s dozens, maybe hundreds of people out there without vaginas who must be pissed that they were passed over.“), righton @ 7 (“(You gotta know Bush left to his own devices would have nominated smart male judge…“):

    Chauvinist pricks. What a perfect illustration of misogyny.

    In case those words are too big for you to understand: The idea that Bush should have chosen a better, smarter, more qualified person (say, a judge) DOES NOT MEAN that he should have nominated a male judge. “Smart” does not imply “male”—and you two are living proof that “male” does not imply “smart.”

  24. 29

    Curious George spews:

    Message @ 25

    “I would not be so content to rely on conservatives ethics…”

    Now there’s an oxymoron: conservative ethics.

  25. 30

    RonK, Seattle spews:

    Horsenuggets dept.: “It’s not as bad as Caligula putting his horse in the Senate.” – Richard Brookhiser, Nat Rvu Online.

  26. 31

    Felix Fermin spews:

    She looks like she’s 80 but she’s only sixty. And what is up with that make-up? Yamma hamma, it’s fright night!

  27. 33


    Dubya has always reshuffled his inner circle from job to job to job. How many positions has Karen Hughes held? Condi? Gonzalez? Bolton?

    It’s getting worse and worse. As his house of (Andy) cards collapses around him, Dubya has more and more trouble finding someone to appoint who’s not already stained by association with him. Why would any self-respecting, competent, thoughtful person willingly volunteer to be engulfed by the stench of this rotting cabal?

  28. 34

    chunkstyle spews:

    Regarding the nominees lack of experience as a judge. The recently passed William H. Rehnquist also had never been a judge prior to his appointment to the SCOTUS in 1972.

  29. 37

    yearight spews:

    Based on the lackluster comments here it appears that GW nominated the wrong person.


  30. 38

    bluesky spews:

    Here’s a point I heard on Fresh Air a bit ago. The fellow Terri Gross interviewed, Cass Sunstein, Professor of Jurisprudence in the Law School at the University of Chicago, said that because Ms Miers is/was Bushit’s “personal counsel” that all legal stuff that went between them can be considered off limits because of Attorney/Client privileges. Ain’t that beautiful. Since she has no judicial record, there isn’t much to go on except stuff like that. And now, the Dems (or even the Pubes) can’t even get at some of what little record there is. Perfect.

  31. 39

    righton spews:

    Felix, commenting on her non-babe appearance..

    Come on, we got Ruth Bader-Buzzie Ginsburg….heck Harriets a supermodel compared to her..

  32. 41

    Janet S spews:

    To all the males on this site who think it is appropriate to mention women’s physical attributes: you are all bigots. It has absolutely nothing to do with anything, and shows that you have small minds. I’ve lost a lot of respect for many of you.

    I disagree with Miers being selected because I don’t think she is qualified, not because of what she looks like.

  33. 42

    Puddybud spews:

    Hey Janet S. Welcome to the LEFTIST PINHEAD RACIST Monologues. Nothing is off limits here. Whether it be a House NIGG@ or an feeble looking white lady, these people don’t care.

    Remember, we are in control.

  34. 44

    righton spews:

    Windie, yawn…

    I’m w/ MTR, or worse. I smell a liberal. Should have nominated Ann Coulter. Another attorny who hasn’t been a judge.

  35. 47

    Puddybud spews:

    What windie? Righton was using hyperbole. Nothing racist there!DJ said it’s alright if Goldy uses it in his discussions of GWB and his appointments. So Righton implemented that which DJ said was perfectly fine for a LEFTIST PINHEAD Leader!

  36. 48

    For the Clueless spews:


    The Dems were lending the Resident the rope he’d use to hang himself.


    or cheerleading for Jared Taylor by wingnut whackos.

  37. 49

    windie spews:

    Puddy puddy puddy… did I say racist?

    for the record, I’m not DJ, and I’m not Goldy. What Janet S said was true, and both Felix and Righton are in the wrong. Claiming ‘hyperbole’, given Righton’s record, just won’t stand.

    Sometimes, Puddybuddy, your fellow righties are just *wrong*… and its not always good to support them no matter what~

    Oh yeah that reminds me of a discussion a few weeks ago… Without regards to any distractions, do you admit that JCH’s racist comments the other week were wrong? You never answered that.

  38. 50

    righton spews:

    Yipes, all I said was (after lefties were mocking her (go read all the lefty speculation on why she isn’t married)) is that if you want to wave the ugly stick, go wave it at Ruth Buzzie. Yeah, poor taste, but it was aimed at Buzzie, not this person. And yeah, I called her a gal.

    Sandra Day O’Connor was a fine judge, albeit not righty enough, so don’t go playing the misogyny game on us. Its just lefty spin that the right is all white male only.

    I really wish we could have a female Antonin Scalia…man that would be awesome…

  39. 51

    Puddybud spews:

    Yes, it looks like LEFTIST PINHEAD Vidal is calling someone a NAZI. Wow, times sure have changed!

  40. 52

    Puddybud spews:

    Righton: We do and she be black. Janice Rogers Brown. Chucky Schumer would shit a headless lucy on that one. Ooops… he already did years ago.

  41. 53

    windie spews:

    Duh, PUddy thats the point. Well that, and the fact that he so thoroughly demolishes a hack like Buckley.

    The thing is, Buckley=O’Reilly (or Rush or Coulter or….), but somewhere along the line, they realized that directly engaging the left in front of an open audience is a recipe for disaster… SO the modern Vidal’s (yeah I know he’s still around), don’t get a chance to smash them anymore.

    PS Righton: I know who you were talking about… It doesn’t matter the target… The tactic is despicable.

  42. 54

    righton spews:

    Anybody wanna translate for Windie, for me?

    Buckley, chris or bill. any one of them a genius compared to your bunch. Heck, i’ll take Betty Buckley, Bruce Buckley, whomever

  43. 55

    Puddybud spews:

    Winded Barg Bag: That’s the point, A LEFTIST PINHEAD using the word NAZI against his debating 36 years ago started a LEFTIST wordsmithing revolution? As I remember 1968, the Democrats used the police to beat back the parents of today’s Sierra Club, ELF, Greenpeace, etc. parents. You know, the hippies with a bong! Wow times are the same!

    Also, would Vidal say anything less that he beat Bulkley? Course not. I read half that article and it reaffirmed my dislike of him. I’ll take War & Peace or Gulag Archipelago or Long Walk to Freedom anytime over anything he writes.

  44. 57

    Libertarian spews:

    We need better birth control, more abstinence, and more abortions – whatever works to prevent out-of-wedlock births. HAving a kid out-of-wedlock is pretty much a guarantee of poverty.

    Let’s get that “morning after pill” out there and available to anyone who wants it. (Provided they don’t want me to pick up the tab, of course!)

    In any event, let’s see what this lady’s got to say, then everyone can attack her for having the bad luck to be a Bush nominee.

  45. 58

    righton spews:

    Ah, forgot about Al Gore’s cousin Gore Vidal. Saw their building at Harvard though…

    Gimme Buckley plus Milton Friedman plus Goldwater, ah, that would be sweet..

  46. 59

    windie spews:

    Puddy@55 you obviously didn’t read all of the essay…

    buckley was for the police… and Vidal was against them.

    And of course you wouldn’t like it, you’re a rightie zombie/clone/troll. Your kind isn’t allowed to like someone like that.

    To everyone else, forgive the hijack; I happened upon the article (looking up crypto-fascist), and it seemed interesting enough to share. So sorry.

  47. 60

    Mark The Redneck spews:

    David @ 28 – Nice job. You really told me. You can tell you overbearing wife how good you did. You’re a credit to the feminocracy. Tell me, do you get in the far left lane in your minivan and drive 50 while blabbing on your cell phone?

    But I think you missed my point. I’m just saying that unqualified people WITHOUT vaginas should also be considered. Seems only “fair” right?

  48. 61

    Puddybud spews:

    I did read the article you dunce. And I did notice Buckley was for the police. Why did I explicitly identify those who were being beat up. The parents of all the LEFTIST TREE HUGGING PINHEADS of today. He knew what they were beating up. WHat winded, you missed my hyperbole?

  49. 62

    righton spews:

    Goldy said, “We’re not even that excited about her being gay”

    How come none of you holier than thou libs got upset at this?

  50. 64

    dj spews:

    righton @ 51,

    Goldy said, “We’re not even that excited about her being gay”

    How come none of you holier than thou libs got upset at this?

    Goldy DID NOT say that. Sheesh! You seem to be getting the puddybutt disease.

    So, take a look at the original source, and then, perhaps, you can spell out why you believe the statement should upset liberals.

  51. 65

    hardovertoport spews:

    righton@61: Goldy didn’t say that – that was a quote from the Wonkette article. Anyway, who in the hell cares one way or the other? I think you need to get out more.

  52. 66

    marks spews:

    Con 1st @20

    Hopeful, but wrong. This one is going all the way.

    headless lucy @21

    Dude, you really are a nut.

    Bobblehead @22

    See directly above…

    righton @62

    Because you are only gay if they on the left say you are gay, and that it makes any difference to their aims. Not that any of such bluster makes it true, but some people live in an absolutist hell. Fuck ‘em…whatever side they are on…When one gets used like that, bang them back as hard as possible.

    Not that there is anything wrong with that…

  53. 67

    horse whisperer spews:


    Sadly she will have a tough time filling the shoes of of the giant Sandra Day O’Conner. But she at least appears to be a more pleasant caring person than Brownie. It’s kind of hard to imagine Brownie up at night trying to find the right gift, for someone else!

  54. 68

    Puddybud spews:

    PortSide & DJ: PuddyButt disease? Hmmm…? Why didn’t Goldy leave that off of his copy from Wonkette? Besides Goldy sure visits some strange places on the Internet. But, he chose to include it. It’s because that’s the type of commentary he likes to post. And I did get it right, it was from a lefty.

    Break Some Wind: Look at Post #43. You wrote it. Oh BTW, why should I condemn Righton or JCH? Did you condemn Lucite when she blatantly, very blatantly called PacMan a House Nigg@? Hell no racist enabler. When Lucite said PacMan will be put back in the field my the massa? Hell no racist enabler. Now PacMan has left, but he still reads the blog. So when Righton and JCH state something that can be back up by statistics like Dr. Bennett, albeit somewhat clumsily, the facts speak for themselves.

  55. 69

    Puddybud spews:

    Ding Ding, email from PacMan:

    “Pudster, I know where your heart is. You don’t have to answer to anything these idiot savants write. I appreciate you singlehandedly taking on these cretins on animal hind parts. I see they are trying to turn the tables on you. Well being only the black man here reading animal hind parts, I don’t need any hypocrites calling Pudster anything but Pudster. Get it lefties? I know racism! I lived it at the hands of new england type lefties.

    Hello windie. Now you have acquired a holier-than-thou attitude? Amazing intellect upon those shoulders windie. I am so glad God gave it to you. I have to ask; when will you ever put it to good use? What will you say when at the final judgment, God asks why you wasted His gifts and talents? Hmmm…? (Sorry Pudster, stealing that from you). That’s okay windie. I understand you didn’t find anything distasteful when headless lucy denigrated me. That’s okay windie. You keep thinking the way you do. When the missile arrives from China, I’m sure it will have your name on it. As Puddy says, “You are a racist enabler”. Yes windie you are stuck on stupid.” – Message from PacMan

    Once again PacMan hits the rail nail directly into the tie with one blow!

  56. 72

    marks spews:

    rujax206 @70

    When I want to hear from a REAL black guy…which is often…I go HERE

    Why go somewhere on the internet? Meet the individual. You get a much better perspective.

  57. 73

    marks spews:

    @70 cont…

    The internet is a wonderful thing, but if you think it is the encompassment of all human knowledge, and therefore precludes you from human interaction, then you therefore have become that which all of us must guard against:


  58. 75

    Puddybud spews:

    Rugrat602: Thanks for speaking with head-up-de-ass lucite’s mouth. It came out garbled but I got your point. I still don’t know how to fuck myself though. Maybe your experience in this matter can be beneficial to me. How ’bout creating a tape of one of your fucking yourself events and sending it to Goldy? I’m sure he can place it somewhere ( a sunless place perhaps) so we can view the great rugrat602 providing fucking yourself lesson #1. Then you can continue sending in these invaluable educational tapes for us who just don’t know how to fuck ourselves. You know like those CD & DVD companies that send you music or movie videos every month. We can get the “Rugrat602 Go Fuck Yourself Collection”. I look forward to my first installment real soon now!

    To you I am a racist? Ha ha ha ha. No, I think PacMan has stated it best. You don’t know real black men, except those being played on TV. Oh pleas massa rugrat602, stop playing Andy while Steve Gilliard plays Amos.

    You see the problem with Steve Gilliard is that he forgets about the white millionaire who was interviewed years ago on 60 minutes. He gave scholarships to poor black and hispanic kids if they did well in school. He gave a full ride to what ever school that accepted them. Google it rugrat602. I wonder what tough roads Steve Guillard trod in his lifetime. He comments on Bill Bennett’s remarks without evaluating the statistics. He doesn’t want to view 80% OOWBs because he has no answer.

  59. 76

    Puddybud spews:

    Damn PacMan is in the writing mood:

    “Rujax206. I’ll gladly meet you, discuss race with you, drink a soda while you slug back a beer. I’ll even purchase it for you. But you don’t know me, you don’t know anything about racism. You get your racism passwords from the web. Have you a conscious thought about why I wrote you recently about liberal racism? No you haven’t thought about it because you live it! Then you post Steve Gilliard? Rufus said it best a black mooron.org website.

    Have you lived in the projects, multiple people staying the same bed? Getting bit by bed bugs? Seeing cockroaches and ants crawling all about, rusty water coming out of pipes? Hmmm…? No, your lily white ass passes poor black people and turns your nose up at them. You probably say them white ladies clutch their bag as black youth pass by. I bet your wife has done it. Ask him while you read this. Just STFU. Where were you when headless lucy blew a gasket? Nowhere to be found. Sorry GBS, but he’s driving me nuts with his racism schtick.” – Message from PacMan

  60. 78

    Puddybud spews:

    Rugrat602: Go take your Fukitol, so Cynical won’t take those provisions from you. Are you going to meet PacMan face to face? Or R U a chicken?

  61. 80

    dj spews:

    righton @ 71

    “OK, then why’d he include it, he could have omitted it… “

    Why wouldn’t he include it? Again, what is it about the statement (in the context of Wonkette’s piece) that makes you think that liberals should be upset by it?

  62. 81

    Curious George spews:

    It seems that GW done pissed everybody off…….

    © Copyright Reuters Ltd.

    By Steve Holland

    “…Conservatives who formed the bedrock foundation of Bush’s re-election last November immediately protested the nomination as a betrayal of his campaign promise to pick conservative judges, pointing to her past campaign donations to Democrats…”

  63. 82


    You should be making “chicken noises” yourfuckingroyalpainintheassness.

    How ’bout coming across with THIS:

    Day FOUR of poor ol” Rujax’ vigil to get herfuckingroyalpaininthe assness to answer two simple questions:

    “1) Just where was my Congressman, the Honorable Jim McDermott wrong about Iraq?

    2) What part of the new (and fabulous) HA Superstar Rocco Capetto”s bumper sticker “WE GOT TO BAGHDAD FASTER THAN NEW ORLEANS” is incorrect.”

    Take your time…I cut slack for the old and infirm.

  64. 83

    Michael spews:

    Neither Earl Warren (chief justice 1953-1969) nor William Rehnquist (chief justice 1986-2005) were a judge before being appointed to the Supreme Court. It is hardly a prerequisite.

  65. 85

    headless lucy spews:

    re 42: …and look what a mess we’re all in. Your beingrobbed blind by the Bush administration. You’re not in control of a damn thing.

  66. 86

    Curious George spews:

    Michael –

    I agree. And both were good men. I just think it’s interesting that the conservatives are starting to dine on the lamb being led to slaughter before it’s done cooking.

  67. 88

    HowCanYouBePROUDtobeAnASS spews:

    It seems that GW done pissed everybody off… -Comment by Curious George— 10/3/05 @ 9:14 pm

    Nah. There are some happy Conservatives, some disappointed Conservatives, some in the middle Conservatives … and the still irrelevant liberals.

    Now I know you’ll all get your thongs in a twist over THIS line from the article: “I have always voted Republican but I just don’t know anymore.” but the truly revealing lines are these:

    1. Every year I work in the Democrat Party’s information booth at the Puyallup Fair. I usually volunteer for one shift each week the fair is open and while there is no pay for my time, I do get benefits.
    One benefit is free admission. I have not paid to “do the Puyallup” for 20 years.

    Doesn’t that just sum up the ‘something for free’ crowd too perfectly?

    2. The Democrats should be savoring an electoral win in 2006 like a pack of hungry wolves around a fresh kill. Don’t count on it. You can’t beat something with nothing or with the same old stuff voters have been rejecting since 1994.

    3. Even though there are good progressive alternatives to all these issues, the Democrats will not change past positions because the organization remains controlled by people afflicted by the liberal dilemma to “love mankind but hate people.”

    4. Democrats need to understand they are not going to get elected next year or any year just because they are not Republicans.

  68. 89

    Donnageddon spews:

    AMAZING! Puddybud ignores JCH’s racist comments and tries to blame it on liberals, and now he ignores righton’s sexist comments and again tries to blame it on liberals.

    PuddyBud the “Special” King has no clothes.

    just another naked neo-con drinking kool aid and regurgitating wingnut talking points.

  69. 90

    HowCanYouBePROUDtobeAnASS spews:

    “He did it.”

    “No he did.”

    “Nu uh, she did.”

    I know 3yr olds more mature.

  70. 91

    Mr. Cynical spews:

    When I was a kid we used to call the kids who would spit on you and run “dinks”. Rujax is a dink.
    I appreciate all my friends who are always RIGHT that challenge these LEFTIST PINHEADS (aka LENIN’S USEFUL IDIOTS aaka DINKS).
    The DINKS are oh so serious and oh so self-righteous. Some of these DINKS remind me of the Seinfeld episode when George Castanza wanted to prove to his boss that he had a black friend. It was a classic!!! He went out desperately seeking a black friend when lo & behold, the pest exterminator showed up. The next thing you know George shows up at this man’s house and invites himslef in to watch a movie with his wife and daughter. It was hilarious…but almost embarrassing to watch. Then George invited the Black Guy out to dinner at a place he KNEW his boss would be…..just to show off his black “friend”.
    That Seinfeld episode reminds me so much of these LEFTIST PINHEADED IDIOTS who yak, yak ,yak about racism….who in reality have ZERO close black friends. They live in a fantasy world. It doesn’t cost anything to “pretend” they have black friends!!!!!! LEFTIST PINHEADS live in a ‘make-believe” world I like to call NEVEREVERLAND—
    Never ever miss a chance to claim racism, sexism or any fucking -ism in the dictionary as long as it is bad.
    Never ever miss an opportunity to feign being offended.
    And never ever actually befriend or do something for a Black person.

    LEFTIST PINHEADS came directly out of the ANAL CANAL OF THE UNIVERSE!!!

  71. 92

    Jerry Springer Jr. spews:

    Proud @ 90, I can’t think of a more mature commenter to point that out. You should feel very proud.

  72. 93

    bartelby spews:

    From today’s NYT:

    “By day’s end, Mr. Dobson, one of the most influential evangelical conservatives, welcomed the nomination. “Some of what I know I am not at liberty to talk about,” he said in an interview, explaining his decision to speak out in support of Ms. Miers. He declined to discuss his conversations with the White House.”

    Gee THAT’s encouraging. It’s no big revelation, but it shows you how brazen they are that Dobson’s willing to openly discuss his ideological tongue hockey with the administration.

  73. 94

    Mr. Cynical spews:

    Anyone who believe in the teachings of Jesus Christ and openly confesses with his mouth what he believes in his heart is an “idealogue” according to you.
    Your type of “labeling” is based merely on someone’s religous beliefs. Dr. Dobson is a great man.
    You ain’t!

  74. 95

    Puddybud spews:

    Rugrat602 and stuckonstupiddon. Who is blaming anything on liberals? Is your conscience getting to you or are you now barely conscious? I believe in chronological events. Chronologically, you and the rugrat haven’t answered my racism charge of head-up-de-ass lucite. When you take care of the arrears, I’ll take care of the present. The Prosecution Rests

  75. 97

    ConservativeFirst spews:

    marks @ 66

    “Hopeful, but wrong. This one is going all the way.”

    I was being absurd to make a point.

  76. 98

    Puddybud spews:

    Still waiting rugrat602 and stuckonstupiddon to correct their positions. Hmmm…? This silence says a lot about LEFTIST PINHEADS.

  77. 99

    rujax206 spews:

    98- I sppose I might answer if I had a fucking clue as to what you were blathering about.

  78. 100

    Puddybud spews:

    Rugrat602: Go back and reread your inane thoughts and my right-on-time responses. Then you can figure it out.

    BTW: PacMan doesn’t directly write here anymore. That could change if he saw many LEFTIST PINHEADS of the donk persuasion condemn head-up-de-ass Lucite’s racial commentary last month. He welcomes a meeting with you Rugrat602. When he verbally confronts you and your politics will you listen?

  79. 101


    Boy pud…ain’t you the hipster now.

    I would love to meet pacman anytime.

    …you know, some of my best friends are………….republican.

    p.s. I still have NO IDEA what you are talking about…but that’s nothing new.

  80. 102

    marks spews:

    ConservativeFirst @97

    My bad. I have a nasty tendancy to take people literally here.

    Puddybud @100

    I wish I were a lefty so I could apologize. PacMan is da man! I hope he can forgive forget live in some semblance of harmony while imparting his wisdom…it is sorely needed here.

  81. 103

    Bartelby spews:

    Cynical @ 94

    “Anyone who believe in the teachings of Jesus Christ and openly confesses with his mouth what he believes in his heart is an “idealogue” according to you. Your type of “labeling” is based merely on someone’s religous beliefs. Dr. Dobson is a great man.
    You ain’t!”

    I’m sorry I don’t measure up to your standards. I try so hard to endear myself to folks who admire Mr. Dobson. I never called him an ideologue, but that’s the mildest term I might use to describe him. I’d be more inclined to call him a pompous, intolerant, unctuous theocratic reptile.

    I see where you get your moniker, however. You give intellectual dishonesty a bad name. Elsewhere on this site you have characterized yourself as a “libertarian.” I suppose your brand of libertarianism ends at the frontiers of the marketplace; in more intimate environs such as the bedroom you doubtless prefer the stern ministrations of Jim Dobson, Mayor West, et al.

  82. 104

    Puddybud spews:

    Rugrat602: You were asked about Lucite’s racist rant? What is your “official” position? PacMan would like to know. Is your attention span just a few minutes? You haven’t taken your Fukitol lately have you?

    ProudAss: What day is the rugrat602 vigil in?

    Righton: What day is the Greg Nickels vigil in?

  83. 105

    prr spews:

    New Orleans Blues Band lead guitar player, Bill Boudreux wrote this..

    Been sitting here with my ass in a wad, wanting to speak out about the bull*%#$ going on in New Orleans.

    For the people of New Orleans… First we would like to say, Sorry for your loss.

    With that said, Lets go through a few hurricane rules:
    (Unlike an earthquake, we know it’s coming)

    #1. A mandatory evacuation means just that… Get the hell out. Don’t blame the Government after they tell you to go. If they hadn’t said anything, I can see the argument. They said get out… if you didn’t, it’s your fault, not theirs. (We don’t want to hear it, even if you don’t have a car, you can get out.)

    #2. If there is an emergency, stock up on water and non-perishables. If you didn’t do this, it’s not the governments fault you’re starving.

    #2a. If you run out of food and water, find a store that has some. (Remember, shoes, TV’s, DVD’s and CD’s are not edible. Leave them alone.)

    #2b. If the local store is too looted of food or water, leave your neighbor’s tv and stereo alone. (See # 2a) They worked hard to get their stuff. Just because they were smart enough to leave during a mandatory evacuation, doesn’t give you the right to take their stuff… it’s theirs, not yours.

    #3. If someone comes in to help you, don’t shoot at them and then complain no one is helping you. I’m not getting shot to help save some dumbass who didn’t leave when told to do so.

    #4. If you are in your house that is completely under water, your belongings are probably too far gone for anyone to want them. If someone does want them, Let them have them and hopefully they’ll die in the filth. Just leave! (For Christ’s sakes, it’s New Orleans, find a voodoo warrior and put a curse on them)

    #5 My tax money should not pay to rebuild a 2 million dollar house, a sports stadium or a floating casino. Also, my tax money shouldn’t go to rebuild a city that is under sea level. You wouldn’t build your house on quicksand would you? You want to live below sea-level, do your country some good and join the Navy.

    #6. Regardless what the Poverty Pimps Jessie Jackson and Al Sharpton want you to believe, The US Government didn’t create the Hurricane as a way to eradicate the black people of New Orleans; (Neither did Russia as a way to destroy America). The US Government didn’t cause global warming that caused the hurricane (We’ve been coming out of an ice age for over a million years).

    #7. The government isn’t responsible for giving you anything. This is the land of the free and the home of the brave, but you gotta work for what you want. McDonalds and Wal-Mart are always hiring, get a damn job and stop spooning off the people who are actually working for a living.

    President Kennedy said it best… “Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country.