Gonzales vs. The Far Right It would be most unfair of me, or anyone, to jump on President Bush's back about purely political matters while he is overseas attending the Group of Eight summit, especially after his attention was so terribly grabbed by the terrorist attack in London on Thursday. There are times when a guy deserves a break, and I'm willing to do my part in giving him the space he needs to do his job right now. Besides, I've got some newfound respect for George W. Bush these days. The last several years have brought him only dauntless criticism from the left, which he has withstood like a mighty oak in a hurricane. Agree with him or not, his steadfast ways have been admirable - maddening, even, to those who have opposed his ideas. Now there is a new force pushing against him. It is formidable, an armored mob wielding sticks and blades, willing to pummel anything in their path. (Sorry. Hockey has officially resumed, so that metaphor was bound to pop out somewhere.) It is the Christian Right that now chases Bush, as if he were some electrified monster from a laboratory. Their screams have taken over the airwaves. They feel as though they are about to be spurned by the one they brung to the dance. With Roe v. Wade in their bazooka sights, they want the balance of the Supreme Court tipped in their direction when Bush selects his nominee to replace retiring Justice Sandra Day O'Connor. Before the president drops so much as a hint about his intentions, religious conservatives are loudly denouncing U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales. He isn't feverish enough, they believe, to represent their views. And their views are the only ones that matter in America, according to them, since they delivered the election to Bush last year. They think that this government is beholden exclusively to them. Fundamentalist mouthpiece Cal Thomas, in a Napoleonic fit, nicely synopsized his column yesterday with these words: "This is the big one, the main event. If the president does not nominate someone who measures up to his often stated view of the court and the Constitution, he can forget about conservative support for anything he wants to do during the rest of his term." That's pretty arrogant, even for Cal. Conservatives, if they were smart, would look at William Rehnquist's situation and understand that there is plenty of time to bide. Even if Alberto Gonzales does hold Roe v. Wade inviolate (as he has said), there will soon be another opening on the Supreme Court. Still, right-wing zealots find a good many of the Supremes to be too liberal already, even those appointed by past Republican presidents. So you see, the prospect of Gonzales as Supreme Court Justice has left many conservatives gasping for air. One poor sap on Free Republic's website actually said that he hopes the Democrats filibuster Gonzales, if he is indeed Bush's choice - so much for the nuclear option. But the Democrats, proving that they are not nearly as dumb as they look, aren't biting on that. "Alberto Gonzales is qualified," says Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D., Nevada). "He's attorney general of the United States and a former Texas judge. But having said that he's qualified, I don't know if he'd have an easy way through." That's classic political judo. The religious right, as it turns out, has been anti-Gonzo for a while now. Earlier this year, groups like Focus on the Family were suspicious over the Justice Department's stated intentions to crack down on "obscenity" in America. But even John Ashcroft wasn't pious enough for them... To some of these religious loonies, even the Taliban wouldn't be strict enough. Christian conservatives also opposed Gonzales as Attorney General - again, even during a war on terror, they were cackling about his stance on abortion. All of this is giving the president a major headache, something to which he is not at all accustomed. All the way from Denmark, his comments were clear on the matter. "I don't like it when a friend gets criticized. I'm loyal to my friends," he said. "All of a sudden this fellow, who is a good public servant and a really fine person, is under fire. And so, do I like it? No, I don't like it. At all." Then he went further, whacking Senate Republicans with the olive branch. "I hope the United States Senate conducts themselves in a way that brings dignity to the process, and that the senators don't listen to the special interest groups, particularly those on the extremes that are trying to exploit this opportunity for not only their -- what they may think is right, but also for their own fundraising capabilities." As I've said for years, Dubya is a lot like Richard Milhouse Nixon. He's crafty and conniving. He's paranoid about the level of loyalty among his underlings. He doesn't like to be pushed around, and he firmly believes that paybacks are Hell. The last time he responded to this kind of evangelical beckoning, he found himself in his pajamas, signing the futile Terri Schiavo bill in the middle of the night. The result: His approval ratings crumbled. How does that go again? Fool me twice... Paul Heller 7/08/05 << back to the archives
	All site contents © 2005, Paul F. Heller