but, but, but -- they already GOT an up/down vote! these are the REJECTS!

[unblock]

aren't all these nominees people that the senate previously voted and REJECTED? and shrub RE-nominated them?

when frist whines that they "deserve" an up-or-down vote, DIDN'T THEY ALREADY GET ONE, AND LOSE??

[LSparkle]

1. At least a few of them DID get ot the floor and were rejected

and I could swear Priscilla Owen and/or Janice Rogers Brown was one of those ...

[Richardo]

2. No. They never got a vote in the full Senate.

[sui generis]

3. yes, the question needs to be

How bad does an appointee have to be for a Republican to withhold a vote?

Is there anything, anything at all, that would make a republican reject an appointee? Prove it, because there are some pretty corrupt, unAmerican losers that have been pitched, and when democrats reject only 5% of the appointees passed down, you REALLY CAN be sure that those 5% are real genuine gold plated turds.

[quiet.american]

4. President Sends Previously-Rejected Judicial Nominees to Senate

In a bold move yesterday, President George W. Bush re-nominated several highly controversial judicial nominees that the Senate had previously rejected.

http://www.civilrights.org/issues/nominations/details.cfm?id=28338

[Moochy]

5. Not sure about down vote for those tied up in committee

The Republicans are so hypocritical, the putsch did not get what it wanted, and by Bush renominating these judges, they are able to force the issue of the "nucular" option. ( or as Byrd called it the Constitutional Folly option.)

216 nominees have been approved, 10 have been stalled.

Frist wants to place "reasonable" limits on free speech. That should be enough to oppose them, as the tyrrany of the majority will determine what is reasonable.

[RaleighNCDUer]

6. It makes no difference. This isn't about the appeals court

or the federal bench.

It's all about the Supremes. They know that * is going to put someone up who will be totally unacceptable, and they want to clear the road for that.

[unblock]

7. of course. their rhetoric is bu**sh** on many levels

the idea that nominees "deserve" anything is insane. it puts the needs of the senate, the country, the people, the courts, etc., beneath the needs of the nominee.

[paineinthearse]

8. Just got off the Dean/Kennedy "nuclear option" teleconference

Posted my notes at http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x1779309

Please support the post.