Tell Bush he can have his Roberts confirmation vote AFTER

[jobycom]

he fully answers questions about the Downing Street Minutes and about Rove's security clearance.

That's how politics is done. If he wants to ignore our party's voice, we should use that voice to block his nominees until he listens to us.

[Ganja Ninja]

1. Exactly! n/t

[jobycom]

8. Nice pic!

[MsTryska]

2. brilliant idea.

i think this needs to be forwarded on to our Congresscritters.

[ComerPerro]

3. Exactly. He doesn't get to set the agenda.

And, besides, why is it that Bush only does necessary things like this when it serves him best?

[Dr Fate]

4. Yeah- but since we came up with it, its now "Angry, Micheal Moore stuff."

Dont count on DEMs ever doing anything slightly creative like you suggest.

I think DEM Senators should ask Roveberts whether outing a CIA agent is a "high crime" or not- but I doubt they would.

[jobycom]

10. That's a brilliant idea, too. The media could ask Scottie

And make it part of the public dialogue.

"Scottie, does the president know how Judge Roberts feels about administration officials leaking classified information to reporters for political reasons? Or any other reasons? Since Rove's indictment is likely to reach the SUpreme Court, have you looked into how Roberts would address this question?"

Damn I'd pay to hear that asked. Thanks, Doc!

(someone email Randi, she'd bring it up!)

[Dr Fate]

18. It was "Class Warrior's" idea, not mine.

A felow DUer who I often butt heads with, but we both agree that this is agreat question.

I've sent a letter to Kerry asking him to ask that question. Boxer is next.

Help me & CW start a thread from time to time reminding folks of this idea- who knows, mabey we can get a Senator or two to ask the question.

[Maraya1969]

5. Great idea! Let's send this to some Senators

[jobycom]

9. I'm hoping some see it here

I'm sure there are staffers scanning boards like this to judge the mood of the populace. And editorialists looking for their next idea (feel free to steal this one!).

But by all means, email your senators. (I would, but being in Texas, I have better things to waste my time on.)

[mmonk]

6. bingo

[leveymg]

7. Would we have let Nixon appoint someone during the Watergate investigat?

Why now? Isn't this worse?

I'd say, no confirmation vote until after prosecution is completed. Been saying that repeatedly for several days, in fact.

[rucky]

11. Lifetime appointment vs. something we're probably going

to get in one form or another. And when Bush starts "answering questions" it won't be mea clupa - just more crap (see 9/11 commission report). No deal.

[jobycom]

14. I didn't say confirm

I said we wouldn't even let if come up for a vote unless Bush answered the other questions we asked. I wouldn't confirm the bastard either way.

[woodsprite]

12. You forgot to add "alone, under oath" to that statement. n/t

[jobycom]

15. Hah! Right you are! nt.

[Greenbeard]

13. Great idea

An honest leader would be doing this anyway.

[Just Me]

16. Wow!!!! That's quite a rational proposition!!!

:yourock:

[annabanana]

17. and Bolton... we want those Bolton info requests...

that's all...

[jobycom]

19. Bolton's requests need to be subpoenaed for a criminal trial

Of Rove, Cheney and Bush. Other than that, they can just flush Bolton, I'd rather not have to hear his name again.