Or Graham could simply be a moron. The power of stupidity is an awesome thing.

This reminds me of the republican convention--I don't recall the speaker, but they said "it's time to take off our republican hats and put on our american hats." That remark sums up what their party is about, themselves. Fine if you want to put your republican hat on over your American hat, but your American hat should never be removed. They are the party of "me first."

from what i hear, uh, like rufus, huckleberry is more of a tat man than a tit man...

(and of course there's nothing wrong with that -- since we're having a george castanza moment today...)

If you read the transcript, that's really not what he said.

Or have we now decided that we can trust the Politico's "reporting?"

Live by the sword, die by the sword.

Their base will see them as weak if they don't play tit-for-tat. These are people who can't see how the landscape has changed. They think that the Dems tried to Bork Alito (which they didn't really), so they must try to Bork Sotomayor. But they either don't understand how Obama put them in a box because from their perspective they just can't see the changing elecotrate, or they understand but are compelled by their base to keep marching over that cliff anyway and haven't the guts to challenge them.

Obama's reasons were principled -- he disagreed fundamentally with Alito's legal philosophy, and was clear in stating so. Graham, in tit for tat mode, isn't really arguing with her legal philosophy as much as attacking her character. That has been done before to repubs, i.e. Bork, but not by Obama. If Graham thinks Obama's opposition needs to be redressed, it should be for similar relatively high minded reasons, and the argument should be about the direction law needs to take.

Because... then the next time the Republicans control the Senate and a Democrat tries to filibuster a Jeb Bush Supreme Court nomination, Graham can say "I told you so." Or something.

Little Lindsay has a problem too, he is too chicken to come out of the closet, so I would call him a hypocrite, have you ever seen him stand up in favor of gays?

Let's not reason why. Let's just be glad they're so self-destructively stupid.

That has been done before to repubs, i.e. Bork

I'm tired of this stupid meme. Bork was and is a genuinely deranged person who is unfit to sit on any bench.

To e: The real calculus is this: since the GOP are the only guardians of American values, the Republican hat and the American hat are the same. Other hats are unAmerican. So there is no contradiction between pursuing short-term partisan advantage and putting country first.

What's driving Graham's hostility?

Well, the pattern for pretty much the last thirty years has been this: Democratic presidents nominate barely-left-of-center judges with impeccable credentials who are chosen for their merits, while Republican presidents choose right-wing nutjobs who were nominated for the sole purpose of advancing the Republican socio-political agenda. Obviously, it is detrimental to the Republican cause for them to actually admit this in public, since it will expose them for the craven, unAmerican partisans they are.

What I find interesting is that Graham, playing the true victim, chose to focus on the Alito confirmation as his cause. If one had no desire to play the victim, one might look at the John Roberts confirmation process.

But Graham doesn't. He's bending over backward to find an excuse to be a victim.

I was confused about Graham's stance, since I don't ordinarily think of him as one of the true wingnuts. But when I saw him on PBS last night with Gewn Ifill, I suddenly got it.

This is somehow personal for him. Every part of his body language and facial expression showed it. The "Gang of 14" took a lot of heat from the Republican side, and I think he feels personally really p*ssed at Dems who, like Obama, voted against Roberts and Alito. This is a personal "payback" for him.

What I took away from the PBS segment last night was how immature and just plain silly Graham appeared. "It's not my fault," he was saying. "The devil made me do it."

Lindsey has a terrible dilemma...how to get re-elected in South Carolina given that he has occasionally --VERY occasionally, to be sure -- stood up for the cause of common sense. The rabid rightwingers in this state are howling for his blood because of these miniscule missteps. And let's not forget that the right wing going after its own here has major consequences -- they tossed out a relatively sane Republican governor and allowed a dim Dem to be elected a while back just because the Republican broke ONE promise to them.

If Graham was the Senator from virtually any other state, he'd be a solid MOR Democrat, but he has to keep throwing red meat to the huge troglodyte base here (and getting blood all over his hands) to keep his seat. I expect he's going to lose it anyway, but he's going to be desperately tracking father and farther to the right as the election approaches, in a last-ditch effort to hang on.

But of course I agree that there's also a big chunk of personal payback factor working here. Never underestimate that primal urge in an insecure man who was brought up (hauled up, rather) in the midst of the Good Ole Boy culture. Overcompensation is a way of life.

Wah!!! Wah!!!

Karl Rove told me that D.C. is my playground forever. I'm going to hold my breath until the mean old democrats give it back.

Apparently Goober is unaware of the large Hispanic voting blocs in the states of fellow GOP Senators. Or he is, and this is even more inside than anyone can imagine.

Got a link to the transcript, Mr. Somerby? I can't find it.

I was confused about Graham's stance

It's wide.

Steve LaBonne: "That has been done before to repubs, i.e. Bork
I'm tired of this stupid meme. Bork was and is a genuinely deranged person who is unfit to sit on any bench."

I agree, and character is fair game when called for. However, my point was that if Graham is playing tit for tat with Obama,Obama's argument was about judicial philosophy. The contrived character issues with Sotomayor are not directly responsive.

I guess the Graham-Lieberman-McCain political team has too much time on their hands since they've stopped their monthly Iraq trips to bolster the "surge is working" routine. What to do to get attention now? For Graham-Lieberman this is intolerable...no attention. Oh a SC appointment...that's the ticket. Go Graham go. How did such a pretentious, self righteous little twerp ever fool his constituents enough to get elected. I'm surprised he can even remember Sotomayor's name 'cause it wouldn't matter who was nominated...he is against it...but not really...just wants to delay enough to get attention. Game playing like children.

I think Lindsay has a character problem. His character is in the closet.

Graham thinks playing petty games with the Sotomayor nomination is unhelpful to the country, but what benefits the United States isn't quite as important to him as giving an advantage to the Republican Party.

Which he learned from a Chicago sleaze senator.

these people will be the death of us all.

Luther -

What's a "Chicago sleaze senator" anyway? It sounds yucky, but kind of cool at the same time.

You are SOOOOOOO smart!

- Bokonon

I remember Graham from my childhood. He was the kid that kept taking away his football when we wouldn't let him play by his rules. Every time he couldn't score he blamed everyone else and said it was all our fault. (Then he'd take his football and go home.)

I can't imagine how Graham can show, in a hearing, that Sotomayor has a character problem. It's hard enough to show a difference of ideology without delving into judicial rulings.

Besides, it's her rulings which are the primary measure by far. Other issues lead us to Scalia, Thomas, Bork and nonsense.

I haven't read her decisions, but from the commentary it would appear she's quite cautious, not conservative in a political sense, but cautious about straying from precedent and cautious about inserting too much of herself into a ruling. In that way she might be acceptable, but hardly a star player or a problem child.

Maybe someone will find decisions showing otherwise and surprise us all.

So is the Gang of 14 defunct or something? One of those things like "term limits" that don't apply when they work against repukelicans? WE can play tit for tat, too, you know.

Graham is an accomplished, professional traitor.

He's only playing up his "opposition" so that the other side will up the ante. Believe me, Graham is a political creature who knows how to play the game. He has stabbed patriotic Americans in the back on the borders and corporate welfare (including the bailouts). He is there for himself and no one else.

If he gets what he wants, which will probably be a lot of money to his campaign, himself, or used to buy votes back home, he'll vote for her.

Oh, and I might add for those of you who might tolerate Graham as a "friendly Republican" to the left, he's also one who has helped to keep us eternally at war in order to line his pockets with corporate and multinational donations. He spent $305 million in 2007 in order to get elected in 2008.

BTW: those were TAXPAYER dollars in the form of earmarks that he spent. He spent an additional $6 million in more legitimate campaign funds to defeat two virtually unknown and vastly underfunded opponents in the primary and then in the fall election.