Advice and consent

Bush met with at least 70 Senators seeking their "advice" prior to his nomination of John Roberts. I don't know how many Senators he met with again before nominating Harriet Miers, but I didn't hear a single complaint from Democrats that Bush didn't seek their "advice" before making that nomination. Ultimately, the request for "consent" to that nomination was withdrawn and Bush nominated Alito immediately thereafter.

This week I have been hearing all kinds of griping that Bush didn't seek the "advice" of Democratic Senators before making Alito pick. See here, e.g. My question is this: why should he have sought "advice" for a third time in the span of a few months? Did Democratic Senators have new thoughts regarding the relatively short list of candidates that were floated?

This example may be inappropriate, but I analogize the situation to going to a restaurant and asking the waiter what he recommends. He offers several suggestions and you then order, only to have him return and tell you that the kitchen is out of that selection. Would you ask the waiter again "what do you recommend"?