Ya know, I hope Schumer and the Dems on the Judiciary block this guy just because they White House pulled this stupid little stunt. I really hope they have the balls to say, "Ya know what? You want to have these little meetings? Let MoveOn, DFA, and the NAACP sit down with this guy for 2 hours. Or we're going to block his nom."

They won't. Cause apparently, fighting for Democratic causes isn't what we do, but it'd be nice to dream.

1. What did you have for Breakfast this morning? Did you enjoy it?

2. Can you recall the color of your car?

3. Do you recall the telephone conversation in which you were informed of your nomination?

4. Who is the president of the USA?

5. Can you name the 1 branch of the United States Government?

6. Can you recall anything? anything at all?

I wonder if anyone asked Mukasey how he'd handle all of those nasty old Democrat witch hunts.

I would be shocked if he wasn't asked that terms similar to the above characterization.

I really wonder what his answer would be in front of the type of Republicans who really believe investigations of the DOJ are totally unjustified.

Would Mukasey be a "good American" and agree that no laws were broken and the investigations are "political theater" or would he say up front that he'll cooperate in following the evidence wherever it leads? We'll never know for sure.

If the "conservative activists", should we ever discover their identities, still support Mukasey's appointment then I suppose that's an answer of sorts.

Plain and simple. Block the nomination.

Does that mean questions like "Do you have a wide stance?" "What men's rooms do you frequent?" "How do you feel about IMing pages?" "Does your favorite prostitute share a name with your wife?" "How many oil firms have done construction work on your house?"

If so, I think all Americans are interested in Mukasey's answers. Corrupt, closeted, perveted or all of the above? What kind of Republican is he?

Omigod! We aren't planning on breeding them now, are we?

If you really want a republican around the house (they can be cute but do tend to poop on other people's furniture) just go down to the shelter and adopt one. Be sure to cut their nuts off, though.

Any chance they asked him whether he's likely to pursue investigations of his predecessor, his predecessor's appointments in the DOJ and connections to the White House during the politicization process?

Oh this is HILLARIOUS!

THEY helped President Bush decide which guy to appoint and then Senate Democrats want to put conditions on it? SCREW 'EM.

Either leave the position empty (I suspect the government will continue on nicely, thank you very much) OR wait until October and the adjournment of Congress and make a recess appointment.

I am SOOOOO tired of people positioning themselves for more power and NOT doing their jobs!!!

You know, I'd almost pay to watch him recess appoint KEN STARR!!! LOLOLOL

Who were they? "conservative activists" who? Why is it ok to not ask who they were? Why can't we know? Isn't it obvious how important it is to know? ASK THE QUESTION!

Mukasey may well be a man who respects the constitution, or at least would not condone using the DOJ to prosecute Democrats, protect war profiteers and suppress votes. That is where Peter Keisler comes in. Why on Earth does Bush need to replace Paul Clement with Keisler during the confirmation process? I suspect Keisler will keep the lid on the US Attorney documents and other clues that will ultimaely lead to indictments of Alberto Gozalez, Rove and others. Leahy needs to keep his eye on the ball here.

SaveOurCountry,

Suspicions abound, but appointments are the perogative of the President. As for Mukasey being blocked, I say if the Democrats are going to block him, then they'd BETTER be prepared for a adjournment appointment in October...and it COULD be someone they REALLY don't want as AG...so they'd better THINK about it before blocking Mukasey.

Hell, I couldn't read the article with that advertisement strobe light going off next to it. Is this type of ad necessary Salon? After all Google has made a pretty good business without having to assault it's audience with a strobe light.

The Attorney General is a political post, nominated by the President. By contrast, the attorneys vetted on their party affiliations were career employees of the Justice Department who should have been evaluated on performance only. To conflate the two is absurd and right out of the Republican playbook.

Come on, is there any surprise here? If George Bush is not nominating a 100% Bushist buttlicker as his new AG, it is not because of choice, but because he is losing political clout...

the two situations. If Gonzo is leaving under the cloud of partisan judgement, then there truly is a great irony that the next AG would be quizzed about the strength of his republican loyalty. The disconnect is huge there.