ConfirmThem

1) Will Graham and DeMint fight for Matthews?
2) Will Dole and Burr fight for Conrad?

We already know that Levin and Stabenow will not fight for Kethledge and Murphy, Lautenberg and Menendez will not fight for Stone, Warner and Webb will not fight for Getchell and Mikulski and Cardin will not fight for Rosenstein.

At least we know Hutchinson and Cornyn will fight for Haynes, and Specter will fight for Pratter (if for no other reason than to get Short confirmed).

It will also be up to Specter and the White House to fight for Keisler. I wonder if Sessions and Grassley may still be secretly blocking him because of all that nonsense about the 11th and 12th seats of the D.C. Circuits. They should finally admit that the only reason they came up with that lame excuse was to stop Bill Clinton from filling those two slots.

Lott did great work helping to get Southwick confirmed. I too often wondered why we were working so hard for a man we did not really know. Of course, the answer is that Southwick's views and opinions were being misrepresented, which is plenty of reason to defend him. I'm sure that Lott feels the same way.

1. We've heard all year that Graham didn't want him. DeMint is a freshman cipher as far as judicial nominations are concerned. Doesn't appear to be much fight there for a "controversial" nominee.

2. Dole and Burr don't seem to fight for any N.C. CCA nominee (see Boyle). Or, if they do, they don't fight very effectively. Both are junior and neither is on the SJC, so it doesn't look bright for Conrad.

Not only will Levin, Stabenow, Golden Oldie Lautenberg, Menendez and Webb NOT fight for Kethledge, Murphy, Stone and Getchell respectively, they are and have been fighting AGAINST them by witholding Blue Slips.

As to Pratter, Specter doesn't have to fight. He'll go through like a knife through soft butter due to Specter's status.

Cornyn and Hutchinson will have to fight some to get Haynes through by March or April. Presumably they can do it, though Dems will probably drag their heels as usual.

He's right, at the end of the day this is only a game, and if you are going to play, play it well. Too bad we don't have many more fighters like him left, but in my mind he got a raw deal earlier on the Thurmond comments, so here's to a long and prosperous retirement, Senator Lott. All the best.

I know this is Newsmax and I don't usually count them as a decent source, but this is the only place I have seen this story:

http://www.newsmax.com/insidecover/Boxer_Blocks_Impeachment_/2007/11/30/...

It could make a big difference in who Barbour chooses.

Oz

Read my most recent story, "What is Thompson's path?" on First Cut Politics

I think it is no secret that Boxer is blocking Rogan. Also anyone that was assoicated with Ken Starr or the impeachment is pretty much a no-go. Hillary will put secret holds on anyone that gets through committee that did anyways. I said back in Feb and March that Bush should withdraw all the dead wood. I liked Rogan but he is not going anywhere. Plus he is OLD! It is not worth wasting political capital fighting and fighting a battle for someone who will sit on the bench for maybe 10 years. I am glad that he withdrew Mary Donohoe (probably at her insistence though). Dont be stubborn. Fill the vacancies with the best person you can AND that can get past the Senate obstacle course!!!

Rogan is OLD??? How old are you - 15?? Rogan was born in 1957, so he's either 49 or 50. I'm not close to that age, but I still won't call it OLD. Jeez - we should be so lucky to have conservative judges that age on all of our courts.

Andrew,

Based on your recess appointment post earlier in the week, would it be possible for Bush to recess appoint Keisler this weekend?

It all depends upon whether there's a quorum present on the Senate floor, IMHO.

Recess appoint, Mr. President! Do it, and see what those f'ers can do about it! My guess is NOTHING.

My priority would be Keisler, but heck - recess appoint the whole lot of COA nominees.

such language! But I do share your sentiment.

http://americansweatpants.blogspot.com/2007/12/anger-part-ii.html

If some family moved from Maryland to Arkansas with a child in eighth grade, would that child have been eligible for the scholarships that Huckabee spoke of? No. Is that fair to the child? Why don't you accuse Huckabee of being cruel and racist to children from Maryland?

http://www.dnronline.com/opinion_details.php?AID=13628&sub=Editorial

"If the two Maryland senators block this nomination, they should stop with their questionable excuses and admit they’re motivated by ideology and ego. They should also admit that blocking a courageous and honorable man from a deserved position will certainly make the public wonder if the words “courageous” and “honorable” could ever be used to describe their character."

http://www.styleweekly.com/article.asp?idarticle=15746

"One of the attorneys on Mayor L. Douglas Wilder’s publicly paid private legal team, E. Duncan Getchell Jr. of McGuireWoods, is being sued for defamation by another Richmond lawyer. It’s all part of a grander legal drama co-starring U.S. senators and the president of the United States.

Chris Spencer, a partner at the local firm O’Hagan Spencer, charges in a court filing dated Nov. 14 that Getchell smeared him in an attempt to safeguard his own controversial nomination for a federal judgeship."

http://www.projo.com/news/mcharlesbakst/SE_BAKST_COLUMN_02_12-02-07_QT81...

"When Mr. Bush named Almond, Whitehouse and Reed issued a peevish statement saying that the president had been aware of the District Court vacancy for almost two years and that his choice of Almond was “one step in a complex and lengthy process.” The senators said, “We will give President Bush’s nominee careful but independent consideration.”

Subsequent comments by the senators have not offered much more in the way of enthusiasm for the nomination or determination to give Almond a decent shake.

Last week I spoke with both senators, who don’t seem to know Almond any better than I do, and found them to be in full dance mode."

from BoBo's linked article:

"Whitehouse says that when he sees the crush of work the committee faces, he’s hard-pressed to say it’s certain the nomination will come up before time runs out. I noted that the Senate has a full year to go before the 2007-2008 session ends. Even so, Whitehouse said he didn’t know if Judiciary would squeeze in an Almond hearing."

crush of work? crush of WORK? when the SJC decides to actually do some actual WORK, let us know, Senator.

Sorry I got Rogan confused with Dornan. My bad. Doran is 74. You are right about Rogan, he is 50. They are both former Congressmen from Orange County (the OC) California that lost close and controversial elections to Loretta Sanchez and Adam Schiff. When I saw Rogan and his brief bio, I figured that was the older one. I was wrong. Sorry. Hail to Pitt!!!

You have a valid point, Andrew. I think Huckabee is a little ahead of the curve here. Sometimes what is the ideal solution isn't achievable so you try some stop-gap measures until people come around to your point.

For example, Ronald Reagan thought about running for president in 1968, ran and lost in 1976, and finally won in 1980. The times eventually caught up to Reagan's belief system.

It's best to keep conversations in a single thread, because they get very difficult to follow otherwise. Also, please try to keep on the subject of this web site. Thanks.