Um, Obama is pro-choice, and his opinion has much more influence than Dawn Johnsen's ever will. Did Nelson refuse to support Obama in the general election? If not, then it's too late now for his moral conscience to get in the way of pro-abortion policies.

This is a nomination for an assistant to the president. Since when should Congress decide who works with the president? Also, if this nomination was for a man, would this "pro-abortion" bs be brought up?

Or even pro-choice policies. Please don't use their bullshit rhetoric.

Conservatives are very scared of Johnsen, so I take that as sign that she's the right person for the job. My question is, how is it that Republicans are always willing to close ranks and do whatever it takes to keep ideological opponents from getting their way, but when Democrats were in the minority under Bush, they always folded like Superman on laundry day rather than oppose a lot of the blinkered, ideological tools he packed the executive branch with?

This is especially crazy because the function of OLC is just to advise the President and executive agencies regarding federal law. The President's choice of his own legal adviser ought to be entitled to a fair amount of deference.

Besides, Johnsen already has run this office before, in the Clinton Administration. Her days at NARAL were before that. If she wasn't disqualified in the Clinton years, then why now? The argument makes no sense.

Hey, it's in quotes to show how stupid it is and even has BS written after it to show how BS it is. Calm down; I'm on your side...

Someone should explain to Senator Nelson that a lawyer thinking a legal medical procedure being legal isn't exactly controversial. Or at least, it shouldn't be.

I thought the GOP senators from her state were on board. Have they backed off?

I remember when an up-or-down vote in the Senate was the very Palladium of our system of government.

Pro-abortion rights, then.

the opposition because of her being prochoice is just the public excuse, the real reason is solely "her criticism of the Bush administration's rampant law breaking,"

"If she wasn't disqualified in the Clinton years, then why now? The argument makes no sense"

It makes perfect sense. Republican's just want to keep their base riled for as long as possible, keep the money and base support going. They get to show the wingnut base they really do care about abortion issues afterall, their track record while in power notwithstanding.

I think the republicans are sending a message: don't mess with torture if you expect to get anything but obstruction from us.

And good question, Molly. How about the Senators from her state?

@Tempered Optimism:

Well, yes. I meant that the argument they're making makes no sense. The political motives for making that argument may still be perfectly intelligible, and I'm sure you're at least partly right about what they are. I also think this is partly retribution because Johnsen was such an outspoken critic of Bush's corrupt and incompetent DOJ.

He believes that the Office of Legal Counsel is a position in which personal views can have an impact and is concerned about her outspoken pro-choice views on abortion.

Her personal views earily reflect the current federal views regarding abortion: that it's legal. Nelson has outed her for what she is - yet another radical supporter of the constitution.

In theory I have no problem with someone excercising some independence from their party so long as they take a logical, principled and educated stand on whatever the issue may be, but Ben Nelson is really starting to annoy me.

Curiouser and curiouser. Nelson is going to vote against confirming a person who is in favor of upholding the law of the land, because he doesn't like a particular law that she will be upholding.
Perhaps he needs to reread his job description.

Time to give Johnsen a recess appointment good till January 2011, then after we have the 68-seat majority that even Cornyn is predicting from the 2010 mid-term, we then approve her. And then expel Ben Nelson so he can join the party he's really a member of: the Republicans.

What does her stand on abortion have anything to do with running the OLC? Seriously why is that even part of the Senators thinking. I just don't get it.

"What does her stand on abortion have anything to do with running the OLC? Seriously why is that even part of the Senators thinking. I just don't get it."

The square root of 4=abortion. Energy independence=abortion. Human rights=abortion. Feeding the hungry=abortion. Respecting the planet=late term abortion. The bible=tax cuts.

QED.

The GOP does not govern, it obfuscates.

Not disagreeing with anything you said sparko, but the point of the post is that this Senator is conservative Democrat, not a Republican.

i don't it's about johnson or torture or abortion. obama just stiffed nebraska's private student loan providers by insisting on reforming the process (students win, loan companies lose). nelson's vote is payback.

obama's problems won't be with the republicans. it will be with the blue dogs.

tanstaafl: Sadly, the blue dogs might as well be republicans. They revert to form when trying to impress the pro-life/let-the-poor-die-hungry crowd. Nelson using the abortion angle is a dinner bell to nitwit Nebraskans; i.e. Republicans.