The choice of the President

You know, the President's in a pretty tough spot nowadays, and not just for the obvious reasons. He campaigned in 2000 on being a uniter, not a divider, and for the most part ignored that promise for the last five years. But he's now in a spot where he can't go back, either.

The nation is almost certainly more divided than it was when Bush first ran for President. Attacks are more boastful and more vicious on both sides of the aisle, and there seems to be no letting up. But I don't wonder if Bush, in an attempt to be liked by all people, chose Miers to try and unite the country in the middle.

Of course, it failed miserably. Conservatives, the group that Bush should have had in his back pocket as he reached out to the center and left, suddenly abandoned him, throwing him further off balance and causing an even bigger fall than he had already undergone.

And now it's more of the same. Republicans are clamoring for blood in Bush's next Supreme Court pick, looking for the farthest right guy or gal to throw in the face of Democrats. "We're still in power, bitches!" they want the President to say. Certainly not a theme that will bring the country together, is it?

So what's a lame duck, 40% approval rating President to do? Pander to a base that savaged him so gracefully these past few weeks, or look to overcome the partisanship and try and nominate a truly unifying character to be the next justice? I wish I knew the answer to that. But his direction should make itself evident in the next week or so.

The ball is in your court, Mr. President. Unifier? Or divider?