ConfirmThem

By AndrewHyman Comments () / Email this page » / Leave a comment »

As a blogger here at confirmthem, I've tried to keep up on all the arguments for and against the use of filibusters to defeat judicial nominations. There have been interesting arguments from both sides. But there have also been some really lousy arguments, and it's easy to spot the lousy ones without much effort. There's a trick to it.

Here's how it's done. You quickly scan through the argument for numbers, like these in former Senator George Mitchell's piece today in the New York Times:

208 of the president's 218 judicial nominees have been approved. That's right: the Senate has confirmed 95 percent of Mr. Bush's judicial nominees. That's a higher percentage of approval than any of his three predecessors achieved.

Mr. Mitchell --- like so many other sly politicians trying to pull the wool over the eyes of the people --- is purposely mixing together district court nominations and appellate nominations. If he had more intellectual honesty, he would acknowledge that filibusters have caused this president to have the lowest appellate confirmation rate of any president going back at least to Harry S Truman.

So, once you spot that bit of misguidance, it's really not worth reading the rest of the piece. Some liberal writers do have the decency to treat readers as intelligent human beings rather than fools, but those writers are the exception. However, I will give Senator Mitchell credit for frankly acknowledging that his 77-word quote from the great Senator Margaret Chase Smith of Maine is completely out of context ("circumstances are obviously different" he says), which makes me wonder why he included the quote in the first place (other than as a transparent plea to Senators Snowe and Collins). As far as Sen. Mitchell's remarks about Justice Fortas are concerned, see here for a previous confirmthem post.