call me a cynic...

is anyone else uneasy about the media portrayal and the left's response to the fuss around sandra day o'connor's replacement? to be honest, i think karl rove's a helluva better political operative than the media and both wings seem to be giving him credit for these days - did anyone really think that harriet mier's had a shot in hell of being confirmed? her nomination did, however, suspiciously set the stage for a study of marked contrasts that has eased the way for samuel alito, jr. (please note the addition of another junior) who, by most accounts will not be facing a filibuster. after all, it's hard to filibuster a white man with such impeccable academic credentials and 15 years of judicial experience when everyone was busy a week ago vilifying harriet miers for her lack of intellectualism and experience before the senate hearings were even scheduled. and then she pulls herself out of consideration on thursday, and bush announces junior on monday. bush and his administration brilliantly shifted the conversation away from wanting another woman to replace o'connor (and/or a hispanic), to a demand for "credentials". and who has better credentials for the supreme court than white men? after all, it requires a vow to uphold the constitution. consider this your timely reminder that the constitution was written by rich white men who sought to protect their property rights, of which women and men of color were included. i've gotta admit that strategically, karl rove is hard to beat. call me a cynic if you want to, but i think the man is smarter than what people have been saying about him lately. i have a hard time believing that the bush administration is really in as bad of shape as the media claims, even though we all know that it is worse than the media will ever admit.