Where's the abuse of power?

Why do the Democrats in the Senate expect the president, after nominating someone for the Supreme Court, expect him to furnish information to try to disqualify the nominee?

If I were the president, I'd tell them to go pound sand. The executive branch has already vetted the candidate, presumably, and thinks he'd be a good justice. They now want to examine every document he ever worked on, going back to when he was just out of law school. NARAL argues, "What's he hiding?" Since when is that a justifiable ground for attacking someone's character? The attorney-client privilege belongs to the client, not the attorney. If the client withholds documents, you can assume it's all evidence against the attorney's competence or character.

All you can ask from a judge is that he/she knows the law and knows how to apply legal prinicples in resolving issues. You can't anticipate every issue he/she will ever be called to rule on, nor can you dictate how he/she will rule on current issues. If you expect to do so, shouldn't you have to disqualify yourself as a fair judge of his qualification? In a normal court, you'd be able to object to jurors with the kind of conflicts of interest that Ted Kennedy, Pat Leahy and Chuck Schumer and the entire Democrat Party has. They get a lot of money from pro-abortion groups intent on protecting their victories of the past. Of course, if you tried to press that, you'd probably have to disqualify every member of the Senate no matter what party they belong to.

This is the result of the courts' failure to stick to their knitting. These conflicts are harmful to the judiciary as well as to the government as a whole, which requires the respect of the people in order to function. As the government shows itself to be more sensitive to big contributors and special interest groups than to the results of elections, citizens are likely to feel that their votes have no meaning, especially when laws passed by their elected representatives are overruled again and again by courts.

Bush appointed John Bolton in a recess appointment after a minority of the Senate blocked him from getting a vote. And they accuse Bush of an abuse of power? Are they really this stupid or do they just think their constituents are? This tactic is being enabled by a group of "moderate" Republicans and Senator Voinivich, who seems to fear that John Bolton is a threat to his grandchildren. (Is he really so dumb as to believe that the U.N. is going to deliver world peace after Saddam Hussein, one of the most blatant enemies of peace since Joseph Stalin, was able to buy off members of the Security Council? If so, what's he doing in the U.S. Senate?)