Rice confirmation hearings not "appropriate" until January

[Jersey Devil]

Am I reading too much into this? Why would the hearings on Rice be "inappropriate" at this time? Is this some kind of response to the voting investigations or is my tinfoil hat on crooked?

WASHINGTON - At the White House's request, confirmation hearings for Condoleezza Rice (news - web sites) as secretary of state will not begin until Congress reconvenes in January, the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee said Sunday.

-snip-

Lugar did not say why the White House considered early hearings inappropriate.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=514&e=7&u=/ap/20041128/ap_on_go_pr_wh/rice_confirmation

[Richardo]

1. They get 4 more Senators in January...

...so fewer Dems to ask embarrassing (or ANY) questions.

[opihimoimoi]

3. Because Bush is not President just yet.....?

[Jersey Devil]

4. That can't be it

The Dems are going to vote for her either now or in January. I will be curious to see if Bush hold off all confirmation hearings for his appointments until January, after the inauguration.

[fryguy]

7. can't the gop set the time limit for the hearing?

and that is procedural which means they only need a simple majority...as does the confirmation. i'm thinking there won't be much/any distention from the gop side of the aisle, so the extra members wont make a difference....

....unless the gop is hoping for an unanimous vote and are afraid the outgoing members would cast votes of conscience against her knowing that they won't have to be held accountable for them.....

either way, it brings up an interesting issue....

[Warpy]

2. Not appropriate until all those GOPs cheated in to office

are there to rubberstamp the bitch into a job she's unsuited for.

[Jersey Devil]

5. That would be true if Dems were to vote against her

but they won't. So is there another reason? Is it tinfoilhatish to think that perhaps Bush doesn't want to push confirmations until he is inauguarated again?

[Technowitch]

6. Hell, it'll never be "appropriate"

That woman needs to be fired for gross incompetence, not rewarded with a Cabinet post.

But hey, it's more "up is down"-ism from the our new fascist overlords. Are any of us surprised?