The Miers/WMD Connection:
Hugh Hewitt has introduced a new argument for the defense of the Miers nomination: Opposing the nomination of Harriet Miers may lead to the deaths of millions of Americans at the hands of terrorists. As best I can tell, the argument is that a Miers defeat would hurt the Republican Party, and hurting the GOP would limit the nation's ability to fight terrorist threats and place millions of American lives at risk:
With a nomination made, I prefer to press to the desired outcome, and support the president and recognize that the defeat of a nominee is a calamitous political consequence, no matter what other people say.Wow. Am I misreading Hewitt, or is he really saying what I think he is saying? If the former, I'll correct it immediately; if the latter, I am just speechless.
It may come as a shock to people, but I am a Republican, who believes that the care and nurturing of governing majorities of the GOP in the Senate and the House in time of war, and the preparation for a monumental struggle with Hillary in 2008, are crucial --indeed the most important-- goals on the table.
We can lose the war. We can suffer terrorist attacks far more devastating than 9/11. Iran is not being deterred, and North Korea continues to be run by an unbalanced dictator with nukes. There are at least hundreds of thousands and probably millions of Islamofascists who would gladly bring WMD to this country and use them in our major cities. I would have preferred a different nominee, and I hope that my short list is the president's short list the next time a vacancy occurs.
But the field is large, [and there are] many forces are at work on it only a few of which I glimpse . . .