A lot of pixels have been spilled on the votes and strategy that Democratic Senators cast and employed regarding the Roberts nomination. I think we all agree on one thing, as a practical matter, the voting and and strategy on Roberts was not about stopping Roberts - Dem leadership could not hold their caucus for a filibuster, even if they were so inclined - but about influencing the next nomination, due from Bush in the upcoming week.
My position on why the voting strategy, if it was that, was wrong is here.
Kagro X had a similar take.
RonK and LarryinNYC presented the opposing arguments.
But Ed Kilgore raises a different possibility:
I think we should all be open to the possibility that Democratic Senators voting for or against Roberts are actually doing so for the reasons they publicly state, just like all us bloggers and activists who have weighed in on the subject in recent days.
I hope Ed is wrong. That would mean that our Dem Senators voting yes really don't care much about the Supreme Court.
But, we have a fair test on all these issues - the second nomination. I hope we can all agree that a most vigorous defense of basic Constitutional rights is a must on this one. Up to and including filibuster.
Presumably we can use all of our powder on this one, correct?