Ted Olson to be selected as the next AG?

[patteeu]

Paul Mirengoff of Powerline (http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2007/08/018318.php
) is reporting:

I'm hearing that the White House presented three names in its consultation with Sen. Specter, the top Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committtee. They were Ted Olson, Larry Thompson (the number two man under John Ashcroft), and George Terwilliger. Specter preferred Olson, whom the White House also views very favorably, and he likely will be the nominee.
Forgive me for looking forward to the potential squealing from democrats about Olson's role in the litigation surrounding the Bush v Gore election controversy. PBJ

[Taco John]

That's cute. I wonder who they'll pick next once that gets shot down in flames.

[Taco John]

...but then again, the Democrats are huge pushovers.

[Cochise]

Forgive me for looking forward to the potential squealing from democrats about Olson's role in the litigation surrounding the Bush v Gore election controversy. PBJ

I predict that they huff, and they puff, and then... as usual, capitulate.

It's not like there is a candidate on earth who would make everyone happy, anyway, when you consider what the JD does.

[patteeu]

That's cute. I wonder who they'll pick next once that gets shot down in flames.

Why would it get shot down in flames? Are the democrats going to block this guy even after all the partisan cheap shots about his role after the 2000 election and concerning his supposed his anti-Clinton activities during the 90's were aired during his last successful confirmation hearing? Will they have a new plan of attack or are they going to rehash all the old news?

[Taco John]

Why would it get shot down in flames? Are the democrats going to block this guy even after all the partisan cheap shots about his role after the 2000 election and concerning his supposed his anti-Clinton activities during the 90's were aired during his last successful confirmation hearing? Will they have a new plan of attack or are they going to rehash all the old news?



You think that the Democrats are just going to go silently while Bush nominates another of his lawyers to the top justice post in the land?

I think Cochise probably has it right. They'll huff and puff and blow their own house down. I think the jellyfish Democrats would be stupid to allow another crony to get through the process though.

[jAZ]

You think that the Democrats are just going to go silently while Bush nominates another of his lawyers to the top justice post in the land?

I think Cochise probably has it right. They'll huff and puff and blow their own house down. I think the jellyfish Democrats would be stupid to allow another crony to get through the process though.
Yep. Yep. and Yep.

[patteeu]

You think that the Democrats are just going to go silently while Bush nominates another of his lawyers to the top justice post in the land?

I think Cochise probably has it right. They'll huff and puff and blow their own house down. I think the jellyfish Democrats would be stupid to allow another crony to get through the process though.

:spock: OK, so you don't really think he'll get shot down in flames. Instead, you envision something like the terrorist guy whose mortar blows up on him (http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=168577). Now you understand why I can't help being a little excited about the prospect. As Mirengoff mentions in a different post on Powerline, this kind of nomination "will put the Democrats in the box, forcing them either to accept a nominee their base doesn't like or to look bad to those outside their base for trying to obstruct a strong nominee."

[Taco John]

Did you miss post #3 or something?

[Cochise]

Yep. Yep. and Yep.

That was just my prediction. I wasn't meaning for that to sound smug or whatnot. I was just guessing that like the war, they will make a big fuss and then act like they don't have the power to stop it. They don't want to look like obstructionists grinding Washington to a halt leading up to an election.

Maybe they even want there to be more fodder for the campaign trail. We've been hearing from the Dem candidates what they think of Bush 24/7 for 6 months now. This would be something new to complain about. Call it an extremist appointment, try to paint the Republicans as divisive, Bush as beating up the legislature.

Hmm. I should be a strategist.

[Chief Henry]

Wasn't Olson's wife on one of the planes that went down on 9-11 by those peace loving, Quran holdin muslims ?

[DanT]

Wasn't Olson's wife on one of the planes that went down on 9-11 by those peace loving, Quran holdin muslims ?

Ted Olson's wife was Barbara Olson, who died on American Airlines Flight #77 when it was flown into the Pentagon on September 11, 2001.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barbara_K._Olson

[Cochise]

Ted Olson's wife was Barbara Olson, who died on American Airlines Flight #77 when it was flown into the Pentagon on September 11, 2001.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barbara_K._Olson

Hmm. Will they beat up a 9/11 widower in the press? Have they been outmaneuvered again? I thought Karl Rove quit :p

[penchief]

I'm not thrilled. It's just more of the same. Some come packaged one way, others come packaged another way. Olson is a Reagan Neocon. He and his wife have been involved in partisan politics nearly their entire careers. He swooped into Florida and helped force an end to the recount. He's a Bush I loyalist just like James Baker.

Considering that we just got rid of probably the worst AG in American history (because he was a partisan appointment), why on earth would America (let alone democrats) want to go down that road again? Just because this guy is an intelligent partisan extremist?

No, thank you. We're trying to purge Naziesque party loyalty from the Justice Department, not appoint another neocon hack.

[Direckshun]

This is like picking the engineer for a train with one stop left.