With writeups like this from the AP's Will Lester, it's no wonder there has been mounting criticism over the polls several media organizations have been conducting:

About four in five Americans want the Senate to thoroughly examine the president's nominees to be federal judges — an attitude shared by a majority of Democrats, Republicans and independents questioned in a new poll.

The rest say those nominees should get the benefit of the doubt and get approved by the Senate without much scrutiny, according to an Associated Press-Ipsos poll released Friday.

Why would the Associated Press lead off with a question like this in their article, much less even ask it in a poll?  It would be obvious to most that nobody wants to confirm judicial nominees without making sure their background and legal career is thoroughly researched.

As you read further, you'll find out why:

Senators are locked in a fierce fight over what is required to approve the more controversial federal court nominees. Republicans want them approved by a simple majority, while the Democrats want to require the 60 votes needed to override a blocking filibuster. The Democrats say a minority party needs the method to ensure checks on the majority.

Both sides point to the Senate's constitutional duty to "advise and consent" on presidential nominations. Republicans say that means great deference is given to the president, while Democrats say it means those put forward should be closely scrutinized.

Hence, according to Lester, Bush's judicial nominees are being "closely scrutinized".  Nevermind the fact that some of these nominees have been waiting over 4 years for confirmation, with Terrance Boyle first being nominated 15 years ago.  Meanwhile, the Republicans are being characterized as giving the president a rubber stamp - as Democrats like to say - on his nominees. 

Lester's article is nothing but spin.  The Democrats aren't "scrutinizing" anyone; they are obstructing a nomination with the express purpose of killing it.  The Democrats have not requested anymore information of any of these nominees nor have stated publicly that they needed more.  Lester takes it upon himself to distort what's going on in the judicial nominee battle by infering that the Republicans are simply trying to rush these nominees through the Senate without a proper look into their backgrounds.

Indeed, the true story in the AP poll is placed in the background:

Respondents favored conservative over liberal judges in general, 47 percent to 39 percent. As for a possible Supreme Court nominee, 52 percent said they felt comfortable that President Bush would pick the right kind of justice, while 46 percent said they weren't.

That's what should have led the article, as it was a new revelation, but didn't.  The fact that the poll found that more Americans favor conservative judges than leftist ones and a majority trust President Bush to make sound decisions in picking judicial nominees played second fiddle to a moot point that had no bearing in the filibuster issue.

The poll shows what I've suspected all along; people are tired of the obstruction and expect these nominees to go through; after all, it was one of the central issues the Republicans ran on in 04. If the Democrats continue to obstruct, they are only hurting themselves in 06 and 08.