Why these 4?

[anti_shrub]

Since the Dems rubber stamped every other Bush judicial appointee, what makes these last 4 any different?

Don't get me wrong, I don't want them to cave on this filibuster, but why are both sides making such a fuss over 4 judges out of, what, over 170 total?

Inquiring minds want to know.

[RichM]

1. It isn't the "last 4." Those 4 were opposed over a period of many months.

They are the ONLY ones the Dems opposed.

Tonight, only the Repubs are making a fuss. That's because they're mad they didn't get their way 100% of the time. They got their way only 98% of the time -- but for Repubs, that's not good enough.

On the other hand, the Dems made a show of opposing those 4. That was indeed a "fuss" of sorts. They did it, to be able to claim that they didn't lie down on their backs 100% of the time.

Don't let anyone tell you that the Dems cave in to Repubs 100% of the time. It JUST ISN'T TRUE!! You see, they only cave in about 98% of the time.

[Tatiana]

2. These are the most right-wing of the nominees.

Also, I think the Democrats on the Judiciary Committee decided to "make a stand," as Barbara Boxer and send the message to Bush that they weren't going to rubberstamp anymore right-wing judges.

[Dr Fate]

3. According to the media, this is "all about the base"

Hey DEMS, if you wanna please the base, I could think of about 100 other things that would do that better...

...not that I dont appreciate the 2 or 3 times that you have stood up to Bush/media- keep it up!!!

[pansypoo53219]

4. cause these are the

crazy neoconderthals.