I have discovered a candidate who CNN thinks is on Bush's short list who would be reasonable. Edward Prado of the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals. Was nominated to the Federal District Court by Reagan in 1984 and Nominated to the US Circuit Court of Appeals by Bush in 2003. Someone who appears upon initial inspection to actually resemble some spirit of moderation. My money is on Bush nominating an Edith Jones or a John Luttig, and I have a plan. Please tell me if my plan is flawed and full of crap.
Democrats should hold a huge press conference tomorrow morning anouncing that President Bush should nominate Judge Prado to replace O'Connor and would recieve their overwhelming support. Call on the President to reach accross partison lines for a consensus nominee. I know, the worst news day if you want something to get covered is Friday, but its important to do this before Bush can nominate someone. We then spend the weekend on TV shows talking about how Bush should nominate Prado. This would serve as a preemptive strike saying that "we'll reach out for a nominee who Bush himself appointed to the US Court of Appeals that would be acceptable to both sides." It puts pressure immediatly over the weekend on Bush to nominate a consensus nominee instead of going for his favorite strategy of relying on brute force of the majority. Should Bush ignore us and appoint a strong conservative we have gained more legitimacy for our case for filibuster before they can start spouting their bogus lines that "Democrats will oppose anybody Bush nominates." It makes the Republicans the ones playing partison politics and the Democrats the ones extending their arm for bipartison agreement.
It strikes me that this would lead to one of two likely outcomes, either Bush caves to the idea of an overwhelming confirmation and nominates Prado (unlikely) or we fight the confirmation battle on our turf instead of theirs this time. This time we take the offensive before there even is a nominee.