alot of times i get into a discussion about politics and movers and shakers. generally, i keep my mouth shut about what a course of action ought to be, and instead, deal in the realm of what is. take iraq. while i probably set the standard of fence post sitting, i never was 100% comitted to the action we see today. i sure as hell wasnt against it. my answer always was, if the evidence leads us there, and the situations are what they truely are; some course of drastic action has to occur. months later, were sitting in the sandbox we bought. some say with blood, some with trust, all of us say with money. but im not bitter. im not angry. i dont picket. i dont carry signs, or set up rediculous millitant camps for peace. i dont write my congressmen each day begging us to blow a bigger hole in the sand.

but. today i am quite bitter. i am very upset in the president's choice in a supreme court justice. miers is not the choice to have made. im not anti woman. im not anti issue of any kind, for the purposes of this, im anti this selection process. was this a case of, pick who sits next to me? you cant convince me, that no stonger candidate exists than a woman who is the president's personal attorney, for one year; to be one of the 9 most important judicial figures in the world. i had hopes for another woman, to be honest. i had some hopes for person of storied, yet staunch decisions based upon judical merit. i hoped for a name that would be seen as a weathered rock, from which we could root the system of justice upon, for the sake of this nation. what we got was a pebble, magnified by a drop of rain.

there is no telling what this person thinks, what this person feels. but we can tell that loyalty is a strong component of her character. to me, however unpopular i might be, find loyalty to any person to be a disaster when appointing them to the highest court of the land. even if shed turn out to be my exact ideologe, i loathe this choice. this is wrong. purely wrong. id much rather see Hillary Clinton produced as a choice of nomination before the senate. i stomached john roberts. but this is not how this is all supposed to work. with hundreds of qualified members of the court already sitting; with thousands of intelliglble scholars and jurists to pick from, like a field of wheat before him. he reaches for the chaff on his sleeve.

whats wrong about this, is whats wrong about welfare, its whats wrong about "diversity", its whats wrong about the war on terror.... its never about solving the problem. its not about putting forward the best, most logical solution for success. its about gratifying the easy choice. its about dodging a difficult question. with welfare we set up an entire socio-economic contingent of people to fail, we throw them money. we give them. we give. no one earns. - with diversity its about holding out a watering can over the desert. its a way to show you a flower and say the sands are fertile, while everything around you rots and decays. its about deciding to put a black man ahead of 3 white men, 2 asians, and a jew, based on the free points earned from the color of his skin, because we didnt meet a quota any other way. - when we fight terrorists, were invading and nation building. were banishing governments that have power to fight, and were alienating the people that are charmed and lead to back terror as a way to make us flee. we bomb the houses of the holy, to supp on the praise of what we did. we created a system of poor people that hate us more than ever. .... ..... .....

in every sense, we failed to put forward the effort to make hard work pay off. we havent instituted wpa projects to skill new labor, we havent funded education and future initiatives to make the young black man a success on his own, and we havent killed any more terrorists than weve created. we havent picked a supreme court justice to proud of. we havent selected from the finest minds of jurisprudence, we havent looked into the ranks of the qualified standing ready. we havent rewarded the faith of the legal system actors with this nomination. we took an easy road once again. we didnt look to find the best lawyer, the most prudent judge, the most pontific decisionist, nor the most reliable thinker. we grabbed who was handy, and its a disgrace.