Maybe for some...but not all of us.
I have watched the Senate almost every day...and one of the most used arguements the Republicans use against the dems is...."President Bush deserves and up or down vote."
So...I just feel that since that is the Republican mantra...it should have applied in this case..
Plus...don't you think it would be been interesting, and possible enlightening to find out who would have voted for her and those who would have had the integrity to NOT fall into party line..and vote against her???
I hear you. But there is an overarching political process that played with the Miers nomination in a way that does not come into play with the others. The others have some amunt of background that admits a debate on their merits. Details of those debates are present in the Congressional Record.
Plus...don't you think it would be been interesting, and possible enlightening to find out who would have voted for her and those who would have had the integrity to NOT fall into party line..and vote against her?
I think the reason given for pulling the nomination, and the likely reason for withholding advise & consent would have coincided for many Senators. To wit, lack of information or insight into the nominee's judicial philosophy - Senator's are wise to not play "this much" roulette with what should be a reasoned decision.
Given a nomination of a certain degree of stealth, I would like to hear the Senators go on record as to their stance on that matter of principle - but I prefer that the issue of "stealth" not be introduced by the President in the first place.