Huh?

Yesterday, the talk was of the Dems standing firm, with one or two exceptions, against Gonzales and possibly even a filibuster. But in today's NY-"Gephardt is Kerry's pick for VP"-Post we read that:

[T]he Senate's top Democrat, Harry Reid, predicted Gonzales would receive the backing of only 20 or so Democrats, but that the party would refrain from mounting a filibuster to block his confirmation as attorney general.

Four years ago, John Ashcroft was confirmed on a 58-42 vote.

Who in the hell are the 20 Democrats that are considering voting for Gonzales?! Chucky has apparently had an about face, after praising Gonzales throughout most of December and January:

(from the above link)
He was so circumspect in his answers, so unwilling to leave a micron of space between his views and the president's, that I now have real doubts . . .

Great timing, Chucky...wait until the eve of his confirmation by the Senate to make clear your opposition. Just to remind you all, Shumer went from saying he expected the Gonzales nomination to go smoothly, to saying he was "re-thinking his support" to this most recent statement. While Shumer is a great Democrat in many ways, I hope to god he is a little more on point as head of the DSCC where he's been put in charge of the Democrats' efforts to win back the Senate.

...in looking at these two articles, I realized that the time stamp on the article detailing a possible filibuster against Gonzales is 10:54 PST. Most likely this AP story is not reflected in the Post's reporting. Well, we'll know for sure tomorrow. Please contact your Senators and urge them to filibuster Quaint-man.

[UPDATE]: I overlooked this Times piece which claims that Reid told reporters yesterday that Senate Dems would reserve the so-called "nuclear option" for whatever winger Bush nominates to the Supreme Court. Fine. But I still don't like the idea of some 15-20 Democratic Senators voting for Quaint-man Gonzales.