Daniel Henninger says Democratic obstructionism has its main roots in the aftermath of the 2000 presidential election.
The death-struggle in the Senate over the Bush judges is best understood as a re-fighting of the post-2000 Florida election challenge. Democratic logic, premised on the famous 5-4 Bush v. Gore decision, runs like this: Bush stole the 2000 election with a Republican-dominated Supreme Court. The resulting presidency, as they've often said, is "illegitimate." Because "justice" failed in 2000, Karl Rove got four years to brilliantly manufacture a bare, popular-vote majority of social conservatives in 2004, extending the illegitimate Bush presidency another four years. Ergo, obstruction is justified.Posted by Alan at May 20, 2005 05:28 AMJudicial nominations, the Bolton nomination, Social Security reform--Just Say No. But will the voters buy it?