If the recent Supreme Court vacancies have taught us anything, it is that Senate Democrats are run by a tiny constituency who demand that all Bush nominees must be blocked at all costs, even if the rationale to do so must be created from whole cloth. (See: "Groups, gay rights.") But aspiring court justices are not the only ones who face such a churlish reception.
Take the case of Roland Arnall, the nominee for ambassador to The Netherlands, as pointed out by Boi From Troy. Arnall's company (from which he has now severed his ties), Ameriquest, makes home loans to those who might not otherwise qualify as unacceptable credit risks. His nomination has thus far been stymied by Democrats and their permanent grievance lobby who apparently aren't clear on the elementary concept that those with poor credit ratings generally pay higher interest rates.
(Meanwhile, the Dutch are practically begging us to put a new ambassador in place.)
So let me see if I am clear on this: Arnall is being criticized as "predatory" for making the American Dream possible to people who would not otherwise have such an opportunity. If there were an argument any more circular than this, it could be used to calculate the value of pi.
I don't know if the aim of Democrats is free housing for all of their voters, but regardless, Ameriquest is playing ball with the state attorneys-general who want to shake the company down. So perhaps there is still hope for Arnall. (Methinks the factor that is truly animating the Dems might have something to do with Arnalls' choices regarding their political contributions.)
If this predatory-lending strawman fails the Democrats, they can always fall back on the more direct anti-Semitic smear campaign waged, as is so often the source of such things these days, by the left. (Search the linked page for "Shylock," "greedy" and other related epithets.)
No wonder Harry Truman got a dog.