Yet, another story about discord among Democrats. One would almost think that Democrats have somehow become relevant again:
The party's liberal base, whose contributions during judicial confirmation fights earlier this year have helped the Senate Democratic campaign fund amass twice as much as its Republican rival, is pressing for another vigorous fight against Judge Roberts as documents from the Reagan administration clarify his conservative credentials.Hey, Russ, can you at least try to get him to answer some questions during the hearing? And get all the documents? There are some big issues...like the right to privacy...that need answers. Remember, this is the same White House that lies and hides the facts. Don't expect they've changed on the Supreme Court nominee. Plus, when I read this, I can't shake the fact that Feingold voted for Ashcroft's nomination in 2001. At the time, the Judiciary Committee was evenly split. Without him, the Judiciary Committee would have tied and the nomination would have probably died. But, he sided with Bush on that one.
But as Senator Edward M. Kennedy of Massachusetts and other liberal stalwarts on the Judiciary Committee step up their criticism of Judge Roberts's record, other Democrats are reluctant to join them.
"I am turned off by senators trying to act like they have already found the guy out and they know what he is like," said Senator Russell D. Feingold, a Democratic committee member from Wisconsin who spent last week focused instead on calling for a pullout from Iraq. "I am not part of any Democratic effort to 'set the table' " for the hearings by laying the groundwork to criticize Judge Roberts, he said.
