Will Democrats challenge or fold?

John Cole’s position on the nomination of Michael Mukasey for Attorney General is the best I’ve read:

And so on and so forth. Again, confirmation is probably the right thing to do, but I would do it with some opposition, because the despicable bastards on the right will just expect you to let him continue the popular Bush policy of ‘DOING WHATEVER THE FUCK WE WANT’ should he be greenlighted without opposition.

And George Will’s column in today’s Washington Post is exactly the opposition necessary given this president’s absurd Constitutional claims. Primarily, this, in the form of questions for Mr. Mukasey:

The Bush administration says “the long war” — the war on terrorism — is a perpetual emergency that will last for generations. Waged against us largely by non-state actors, it will not end with a legally clarifying and definitive surrender. The administration regards America as a battlefield, on which even an American citizen can be seized as an “enemy combatant” and detained indefinitely. You ruled that presidents have this power, but you were reversed on appeal. What do you think was the flaw in the reasoning of the court that reversed you?

I’ve read that civil libertarians are unlikely to find reasons to agree with Mr. Mukasey’s approach. The American “enemy combatant” example alone is enough for me to be aghast at his concern for our Constitution. His inevitable push for more “tools” in the president’s never-ending war is scary, too. Unlike what the Wall Street Journal prefers us to believe, Mr. Will understands the Attorney General’s job.

Attorneys general serve at the pleasure of the presidents who choose them but swear to uphold the Constitution.

The Constitution should be held above mere politics. I have no faith that it will be before January 2009.