[Acton]

This is an embarrassing example of the MSM's work on reporting the news. No one even bothers to go back and check the Constitution to see if maybe, just maybe, there is an answer in the Constitution, or in the writings of the Framers. No, instead, the authors say things like, "George Bush started it..." ("The president [note lower case], who initiated the conflict ....') and finsing only scholars who declare that the filibuster includes the right to filibuster judicial nominees. It does not, and as we discovered several years ago, it does not include the right to filibuster a treaty. They don't even present the "other side" of the argument that a filibuster is different than a vote. There is no discussion of the Adam Clayton Powell case and House rules. It is just an "us versus the unreasonable Republicans."

There are lots of clever people in the world. Some, if they can do math and science, and are willing to work hard, become our doctors and scientists, or our business leaders and accountants. If they can't do math and science, but are willing to work hard, they may become our politicians, lawyers and judges. And if they are just clever enough, and don't want to do the hard work that is required to understand the law and politics, they become journalists.

[jackbill]

While serving alongside Owen in 2000, Gonzales wrote an opinion criticizing her and two other dissenting judges for "an unconscionable act of judicial activism" in seeking to restrict a minor's right to an abortion.

That's a damnable lie. In the case in question, Gonzales was in the 6-3 majority. He criticized the judges in the minority who took a particular position in their dissent. Judge Owen DID NOT TAKE THAT POSITION IN HER DISSENT. Her dissent was based on something entirely different.

Is it any wonder why people claim that the WAPO is biased when all they do is repeat DemocRAT lies?

[SoFloFreeper]

Anyone see similarities between these two?

Senator Harry Reid of Nevada (the 21st Century)

Senator Pat Geary of Nevada (the Godfather Part II)

[VRWCmember]

The president, who initiated the conflict by renominating judges whom Democrats had blocked during his first term and demanding new votes this year, is essentially guaranteeing a showdown that is as much about the power of the presidency as Democratic obstinacy, according to numerous government scholars. ****

The conflict was initiated by the obstructionist dems. In fact, you might say the conflict was initiated back in the '80s when the disgraceful treatment of Judge Bork resulted in his name becoming a verb for disgraceful smearing and lying about an honorable judge to derail his confirmation.

[1Old Pro]

Enough Already, VOTE!

[Tanniker Smith]

("The president [note lower case], who initiated the conflict ....')

That's actually correct standard usage. The word "president" is only capitalized when used as a title as in "President Bush" or refering to the name of the office as in "The President of the United States".

It is lowercase in the sense of "The president made a pass at two women today and shouted, 'Hot dang! It's like I was back in Hot Springs!" The lowercase 'p' doesn't demean the president. (Clinton did fine demeaning himself.)

TS

[Tanniker Smith]

"GIve my nominees a fair up-or-down vote or don't take another Congressional Recess."

TS
(now, *that* would be the nuclear option -- the Senate would go ballistic!)