Also, the Democrats may have boxed themselves in. Last week, in exchange for agreeing to stop filibustering three lower-court Bush nominees whom they had tagged as extremists, Democrats promised they'd use the tactic only in "extraordinary circumstances." That phrase could haunt them down the road, because it arguably sets the bar higher than it was before.
Many analysts are asking: How can Democrats credibly invoke "extraordinary circumstances" against a conservative nominee for the Supreme Court - after having just agreed to stop filibustering an appeals-court nominee (Janice Rogers Brown) who once assailed FDR's New Deal as a "socialist revolution," and after having agreed to stop blocking another nominee (William Pryor) who believes that the 1973 Roe v. Wade abortion ruling was an "abomination"?
What an interesting idea. It certainly makes sense. Bush just better not make the mistake of his father or Eisenhower.
I am hoping and praying we get one moderate or liberal to retire this year in addition to Rehnquist.
The dems do not feel the need to be "credible", or consistent, or rational. No one who watched them lie over and over again and trash the reputations of Brown and Owens could think that "credibility" or any sense of decency will stop them.