The Philadelphia Inquirer has a (mostly) dead-on
analysis today: "The conservatives have a message for President Bush: Satisfy us, or else. A historic moment has arrived. For decades, they have pined for a conservative takeover of the U.S. Supreme Court. They have tried to mute their concerns about Bush's first nominee, John G. Roberts Jr., a pillar of the legal establishment and therefore not the conservative ideologue of their dreams. But now that Bush is poised - any day now - to name his second justice, to replace Sandra Day O'Connor, they seem anxious to collect an IOU....
To fill the seat that could tip the court rightward, either Bush serves up a die-hard conservative nominee who doesn't mince words about opposing abortion and gay rights (in other words, someone more outspoken than Roberts), or he will surely infuriate many of his own followers - who will then assail him as a betrayer of the movement, and bash him with the fervor normally exhibited by liberals."
I do take issue with the article's assertion that religious-right voters handed Ohio to Bush -- it's just as likely that the nonsense about "Boo! Kerry won't protect you from terrorists!" (preceded by Kerry's failure to quickly knock down the "Swift Boat" nonsense) is what did Kerry in. But the article
is right to say the far right saved Bush's sorry butt in the crucial South Carolina primary in 2000.
This is a major reason why it matters when we have a real chance to boot a right-wing senator like Rick Santorum, who referred to the "so-called right of privacy" in the Constitution.
(Abortion? Ha! Kiss that birth control goodbye too!)
For more on defeating that moron, check out PA-based StopSantorumNow.
And please recommend this diary! :-)