Today's post is going to be like my mind - scattered. There is so much in the news that has me on edge but I only have so much time to blog it out of my system (or at least quiet the screaming to a dull roar).

Harriet Miers

Yesterday's statements from both James Dobson (Focus on the Family) and the White House have me on edge. From Dobson:

What did Karl Rove say to me that I knew on Monday that I couldn't reveal? Well, it's what we all know now, that Harriet Miers is an Evangelical Christian, that she is from a very conservative church, which is almost universally pro-life, that she had taken on the American Bar Association on the issue of abortion and fought for a policy that would not be supportive of abortion, that she had been a member of the Texas Right to Life.

If we all know it, why couldn't he talk about it? And now from the White House, via this SFGate.com article:

"People are interested to know why I picked Harriet Miers," Bush told reporters at the White House. "They want to know Harriet Miers' background. They want to know as much as they possibly can before they form opinions. And part of Harriet Miers' life is her religion."

This woman is going to go after Roe. I think everyone who supports a woman's right to choose knows this. My problem is that, up until now, Democrats have been content to let the Republicans derail this nomination. Dobson's statements and Bush's statement seem to be a clear effort to bring the far right back into the fold... It might work. In the meantime, having been content to let conservatives hoist Miers on Bush's petard, are not on record with any concerns. Won't this make it harder, IF the right comes back into the fold, for Democrats to oppose her? She needs to be opposed. Sometimes you have to take a stand.

Speaking of stands - my mother sent me this political cartoon that kinds of sums up, for me, the impotence I feel Democrats are demonstrating:



((deep sigh))