George, let me suggest that his ASSURED confirmation was WHY one of your Texas senators could vote against him. This was one of those, "if it's close, I'll vote for the guy, but if it is a lock, I want to be able to 'vote my conscience.'" I'm not too sure I'd be that upset with KBH over this.
Enh. To me it's the principle of the thing. In the email I wrote her via her Senate website I pointed out that we've got too many leftists blocking Bush's judicial nominees (as well as the usual RINOs) without getting help from the Right. Just doesn't sit well with me.
That's the way I read it as well. And isn't Murkowski in a fight in AK, so she was able to not vote and look moderate"? Right now, it's all about the numbers and the rest is just theater for those who aren't paying close attention.
Why should it be against her conscience to vote for Holmes?
Kay Bailey has enormously disappointed me, for what it's worth. Holmes had opposition because he was pro-life and because he was Christian, and because he had the audacity to write about his Christian beliefs. That is all. This is the clearest example of anti-Christian bias that I've ever seen.
The left might as well hang up a sign that says, "Christians Not Welcome."
That is loathsome and what I despise about politicians.