Nerf Vibrator

It looks like President Bush is close to nominating Ted Olson as the replacement for outgoing Attorney General Alberto Gonazales.

Not so fast, says Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid vowed on Wednesday to block former Solicitor General Theodore Olson from becoming attorney general if President George W. Bush nominates him to replace Alberto Gonzales.

Congressional and administration officials have described Olson as a leading contender for the job as the nation's chief U.S. law enforcement officer, but Reid declared: "Ted Olson will not be confirmed" by the Senate.

"He's a partisan, and the last thing we need as an attorney general is a partisan," Reid told Reuters in a brief hallway interview on Capitol Hill.

Yeah, well, excuse me if I'm a tad skeptical about the Democrats' resolve to hold firm against the Republicans and the president. Think back to how firmly they stood up to them on renewing the PATRIOT Act, funding the Iraq war, and revising the FISA Act. Heretofore Democratic resoluteness has been about as ineffective and frustrating as a Nerf vibrator.

That's to be expected, though. As David Neiwert at FDL notes, the Democrats are the only ones in Washington who are expected to behave nicely.

For some reason, Democrats must be the model of decorum and civility and moderation and bipartisanship when it comes to governing; any deviance from this script brings on fainting spells and finger-wagging. Meanwhile Republicans can be as vicious and nasty and ruthless and nakedly partisan as they please, and their “toughness” is merely celebrated.

[...]

We’ll see if Olson is indeed the nominee; but even if he isn’t, the fact that he’s one of the favorites sends a message. The White House’s response to Leahy and the Democrats is loud and clear, and one we’ve heard before: Go fuck yourselves. You want us to replace Gonzales, a reliable right-wing lackey? Fine; we’ll give you a right-wing consigliere.

If Olson is nominated, watch for the Beltway media in the following days to briefly wring their hands about this rather naked poke in the eye but eventually come around to the conclusion that Bush’s nomination is “bold” and represents his “resoluteness” or some such nonsense. Then the right-wing Wurlitzer will kick in and start reminding us what a swell fellow Ted Olson really is (I think you can hear Joe diGenova and Victoria Toensing winding up their grinders even as we speak).

Compare this, if you will, to the mass tut-tut coming from the Beltway over MoveOn.org’s tough treatment of Gen. Petraeus for his report to Congress. And even more pointedly, it’s worth noting Democrats’ response to the assault — namely, to cower and run from their own best advocates.

These, then, are the Bush Rules in action: Only Democrats have to be civil. “Bipartisanship” means acceding to the conservative agenda. And Republicans can be as vicious as they like, because then we’ll just call it “toughness” or, if it’s really ugly, “just a joke.”

So it doesn't matter that Mr. Olson has been as partisan and hypocritical as they come in Washington; you'll recall that he represented the Bush campaign before the Supreme Court in the 2000 Florida election fight and that he was instrumental in the Arkansas Project, the right-wing hunt to dig up dirt on the Clintons. The president will nominate him, the press will fawn, the Democrats will squawk, they'll cave, and everyone will say how nice it is that everyone gets along so well in doing the country's business.

Cross-posted from Bark Bark Woof Woof.