Seen-it-all-before.
I disagree with this arguement........it is a canard.
As you may well know this whole series of constitutionally mandated steps is fraught with politics.
The Democrats first attempted to further THEIR political agenda with the BORKING of Robert Bork. They next proceeded to further their political agenda with the high-tech LYNCHING of Clarence Thomas. They have consistently attempted to stack the courts with liberal judges who are more 'sensitive' to groups like the ACLU and other neer-do-wells who are slowly chipping away at our freedoms. This process, in-and-of-itself, IS political.
The President (who is trying to govern during a crisis) has submitted his nominations for Judiciary Appointments and the Democrats are choosing to ignore his picks. I would feel much better with Dubya's nominations than those of the Democrats who would prefer that, in the interest of multi-culturalism and illegal immigrants' rights (?), that we not check out any and all leads in the current crisis.
If there is any 'error' on the side of a poltical agenda I would prefer it to be on the side of Dubya.
Bush also supports allowing mexican trucks, stocked with drivers that notoriously disobey safety regulations, to begin traversing our highways, unchecked, and unencumbered, all in the name of 'Free trade', and cheaper transportation costs.
Does this concern you? No, not yet, not until someone you know, is wiped out on the highway because one of these trucks has faulty brakes, or a mexican driver that has been awake for too many hours, then we will all care about these 'for-profit-only' decisions.
The tragedy of 09-11-01, does not make 'Dubya' a God-Like leader, and I notice His solution to this is to grow the Government, not shrink it down.
I still have yet to see any difference between the 2 parties.