[Blood of Tyrants]

A hate to be a cynic, but Bush hasn't stood up the the Rats about blocking judiciary appointments yet. What makes you think that he will in the future?

[cinFLA]

PICKERING!

[votelife]

I refuse to be a cynic. Too depressing. In 2002 Bush campaigned against judicial obstruction. This helped the GOP win the senate by electing Saxby, Coleman, Talent...We almost won SD but those Indian reservations...

In his SOTU speech Bush talked about activist judges and even alluded to a constitutional amendment re: gay marriage. Talk like this suggests that Bush is getting ready to take the fight to the liberals. That being said, we need to back him up.

[CMAC51]

A hate to be a cynic, but Bush hasn't stood up the the Rats about blocking judiciary appointments yet. What makes you think that he will in the future?

To start with because he offered recess appointments to each of the stalled appointees. Pickering was the only one that accepted, but Bush did not try to hide the fact that he would have appointed each and everyone if desired.

Senate judicial confirmations would make a strong campaign issue in the senatorial races if they play up the shortage creating a Judicial crisis. It is too early to tell yet if that is in the game plan.

You can bet that a Dem president would try to solve the crisis in a hurry.

[KantianBurke]

There are two good political reasons why Bush hasn't done anything with regards to his judges. First, its a convenient bloody shirt to wave in front of the base as is being done now - "VOTE DUBYA SO THOSE JUDGES WILL GET IN!" If he were to go all out and get them installed, conservatives wouldn't feel as threatened. Second if Bush were to actively engage the Rats on his judges, all those legislative goodies which he needs to distribute before the election would be held up in the Senate.

Good for Bush. Bad for the country.