[ACAC]

The question is why are they wasting all of this political capital on a nominee who is over 60 years old. He will not serve more than 10 years anyway. I think the other nominees, who are much younger, are more important than Pickering. I actually would not mind if the reject Pickering. Then Bush could nominate someone just as conservative but 20 years younger.

[sanchmo]

The question is why are they wasting all of this political capital on a nominee who is over 60 years old.

Live-fire training for the Battle for the SCOTUS.

[sweetliberty]

"why are they wasting all of this political capital on a nominee who is over 60 years old"

Doesn't matter. They just want to keep the idea of Republicans being racist alive and this is a good way for them to do it. Pickering = Mississippi = Trent Lott = racism by RAT reckoning. Never mind the fact that Pickering has nothing to do with racism and there is no evidence that he does. If they keep saying it they can make their stupid followers believe it and that's all that matters. Get them to believe it and feel mad long enough to get them to the polls to vote for RATS. That's their plan. And the racism nonissue ALWAYS works for them, and the reason that it works is because we play right into their hands.