[reegs]

I think the Republicans have the right idea with the "Catholics Need Not Apply" comment. This thing has legs and even if it doesn't, it is the right thing to do and how can you argue with that.

I'm a bit confused by this comment. Maybe I'm a bit behind in the news. Care to clarify?

[Hostage]

Some of the judicial nominees have been catholic and because of their being catholic they are anti-abortion. So they cannot be confirmed because of Democrat filibusters. Hence, the Republicans saying "Catholics need not apply".

[Huck]

I'm a bit confused by this comment. Maybe I'm a bit behind in the news. Care to clarify?

Judicial nominees. The latest Dim filibuster of a judicial nominee involves a Catholic who is pro-Life. The Senate GOP is claiming--ludicrously in my opinion--that this is a case of anti Catholic bias. Of course it isn't. It is pro abortion bias. When the GOP claimed the Dims were anti-Hispanic regarding the Estrada filibuster, I found it equally ludicrous. And by the way, it was totally ineffective. The Dims have the #s, and are blocking pro life judges who are federalists ideologically. It's that simple.

[irish guard]

>>>>I'm a bit confused by this comment.<<<<

A Bush Judicial appointee is Catholic and the Republicans are trying to suggest the Democrats are anit-Catholic.