HM, what is sad is when good ideals are upheld not because they are good ideals, but because they conveniently align with partisanship.
example: this morning i heard Bill Nelson (sen. from FL, i believe) say that he doesn't really have a problem with the nominee per se, but "why should the white house get to have all their nominees?"
i'm not sure, but i thought that was how it worked. the president nominates, the senate confirms or denies based on qualifications.
i am not suggesting that GWB has put the best people forward, but i am saying that the dems need to put forward the case for why someone isn't qualified or confirm them. "GW nominated them, so i don't want 'em", isn't enough IMO.
__________________
Getting knocked down is no sin, it's not getting back up that's the sin
|