“Jockeying” Over Judges

Directions

Tuesday’s [New York Times] story by Carl Hulse and Neil Lewis, headlined “Jockeying Intensifies in Battle Over Nominees for Courts,” focuses heavily on the objections to Bush’s nominees. A graphic accompanying the page A-13 story displays seven Bush nominees and explains with each name why the Democrats object. There is no room in the graphic to explain why Republicans like the nominees. …

…They also note Democratic objections to Janice Rogers Brown, “an outspoken, conservative African American on the California Supreme Court” and her speeches full of “vivid and attention-getting language.” The vivid speech and radical views of liberal interest groups supporting the Democrat filibuster were not investigated by the Times.

In a Sunday front-pager, Hulse highlighted how the “tone of the debate is escalating”, citing first a radio address from “three Christian conservative leaders” and then Sen. Charles Schumer accusing conservatives of undermining the Constitution (although he is simply a “Democrat of New York” who “used the party’s Saturday radio address to hit back at conservatives.”) Hulse also underlined a high pitch from conservatives by noting a legislative alert from the National Right to Life Committee: “Senate Showdown Near on Ending Filibusters of President Bush’s Judicial Nominees!” screamed the headline on an action alert distributed in recent days by the National Right to Life Committee.” The liberal base urging the Democrats to obstruct nominations is nowhere to be found, even though NARAL and Planned Parenthood were also “screaming” with exclamation points.

For the complete story, click here.