President Bush doesn't have to send anyone up if he thinks they will just be rejected so I guess the seats will stay vacant.
We'd still have our majority.
The good news is that Harry REid claims he is pro-life. If he blocks judges based on abortion, we can use that to convince Nevadans he is too liberal and take him out in 2010.
Catholics need not apply.
The smart process (particularly if it is a SCOTUS judgeship) is to nominate somebody you expect NOT to be confirmed - somebody so reprehensible to the libs that they will waste a lot of money opposing him/her. Then nominate a replacement that is even worse to the libs. Make them spend even more money opposing this guy.
Then, on the third try, you nominate the guy you wanted all along and the Dems will be more inclined to let him through rather than appear unappeasable. The Dems will, by then, have the political cover with their interest groups to let the nominee pass with stern warnings rather than an outright rejection.
Plus, putting up a trojan nominee will force the new "pro-life" Democrat senators to have to declare whether they've changed their minds once arriving in Washington or if they will stay true to the principles they claimed to run on.
The President is the person who will determine the agenda. I'm hoping that President Bush will not give in on this issue.
I think if he puts up Janice Rogers Brown and goes at it hammer & tongs, the Democrats will find it harder than they expect to defend the position that they are pro-black and pro-woman. And they will also find it hard to defend the position that legalized abortion for convenience is a "consensus" position.
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." -Manuel II Paleologus
If W wants to get even he will put up a string of judges the RATS will object to to show how far out of the mainstream the RATS really are. I don't think W is going to lay down to the RATS like a lot of people think, it's going to get even nastier than it was in the past in the next 2 years.
Wonder what those newly elected supposedly pro-life dems have to say about this?
Might not be different at all. We don't know if he had the votes. Might actually not have gotten either Roberts or Alito. We don't know.
Anyhow, I suspect things will be OK. There's got to be another John Roberts out there somewhere, and the D's can't credibly fight people like him.
But....but....but....so many Republicans are proud of themselves for staying home or voting rat!!! You mean....you mean.... you mean Bush's court nominees will never see their names moved out of committee unless they're in favor of the barbaric practice of murdering unborn babies because the rats took the Senate?
Gee, imagine that. Why, who could have predicted such a thing would actually happen?? Will wonders never cease?
I didn't see this coming! /sarc
But... isn't this a so-called dreaded "litmus test" that we've heard so much about?
This is payback to the feminazis who helped elect all those leftists to congress.
The D's doth protest too much.
They sold their soul to get back the committee chairs, but the current crop of DINO's are pro-life.
Popcorn time to be sure.
Mr. Bush should ignore the Democrat swine in the Senate.
If "justice" John Paul "Never met a baby killing I didn't love" Stevens retires before the end of Mr. Bush's presidency, or Ms. Ginsburg, too, just rely on recess appointments.
Phil Kline for Supreme Court Justice!