Three points about this article:

(Sample, because the Times gets prissy in a week or so:)

Senator Patrick J. Leahy of Vermont has urged President Bush to avoid a traumatic national battle over the Supreme Court by consulting with him and other leading Democrats before choosing a nominee, should a vacancy occur.

In two recent letters to the White House, Mr. Leahy, the ranking Democrat on the Judiciary Committee, said that if Mr. Bush took advantage of a vacancy on the court to select a staunchly conservative judge, it would produce a political war that would upset the nation and diminish respect for the courts.

(1) Does the New York Times get paid by the DNC to run these ads-as-stories, or is it just done on a gratis basis?

(2) Would Leahy stand up and applaud if, say, Orrin Hatch had sent the same letter to Bill Clinton in the same circumstances? Cuz, I mean, I wouldn't, and I loathed Bill 'n Hill: The Executive appoints, the Senate confirms. End of story. Leahy's suggestion is an unconstitutional arrogation of the Executive's power.

(3) This bit is priceless:

"The courts are the one part of government people yearn to believe is free of politics," Mr. Leahy said. "That's why the Florida case shook people so much," a reference to the Supreme Court ruling in Bush v. Gore that resulted in Mr. Bush's presidency.

Yeah, because Roe v. Wade, to take one egregious example, was completely politics-free.

Of course, Leahy is another of those Catholics.