From my own readings of this issue, it was due to the influence of the "Gang of 14" that President Bush's nominees for federal judgeships came to a vote, not the other way around. The gang of 14 came together for the purpose of demanding that the appointments come before the judiciary committee for an up or down vote instead of those appointments being sidelined. This is according to the information I read on this issue. So, what was the problem here? I thought conservatives would want Bush's appointments to be voted on, and not held up in committee?
As for numbers 2 through 12, and 14, I'll need to spend some time in researching all the facts for each one. It's amazing that with item 13 you have conveniently left out the rest of the story. John McCain was not opposed to the tax cuts. He was opposed to tax cuts without corresponding spending cuts. That is a completely different argument than just painting his as being against tax cuts.
I refuse to engage in knee-jerk reactionary commentary without the full picture in front of me. That is the tactic the left loves to use, and does not serve conservatives well. When all the information is not presented in an argument, and then the rest of the story comes to light to paint a different picture it gives the appearence there is dishonesty being perpetrated for political reasons. Dims excell at this tactic. I'm appalled that conservatives use it too.
“He was opposed to tax cuts without corresponding spending cuts. “
There hasn’t been a reply to you because people were either embarrassed for you or folks were just shaking their heads because with this statement, they recognized you were a McPain plant/lackey.
Sir, with all due respect, you shouldn’t tell folks to do their research when you spew an interpretation like this on a forum. McCain has a long history of unprincipled harlotry, which includes class warfare/identity politics - some of which would put Edwards to shame.
Just FYI, as you have shown a pattern here, I will not buy your snake oil, and will not engage you in the boundless arguments you are picking. That, sir, is from the liberal playbook and is disappointing to see on a conservative forum, since you’ve notified us that you are keeping score on that measure.