Posted on 04/22/2005 1:58:07 PM PDT by JohnHuang2
WASHINGTON (AP) -- Vice President Dick Cheney said Friday he would vote in the Senate to stop filibusters of judicial nominees if given the chance. That means President Bush is breaking his word to stay out of the fight over Senate rules, Democratic leader Harry Reid responded.Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn. Continues...
==============================================================
Hey, Dems! Filibuster this!
Democracy has come to Afghanistan, Iraq, Lebanon, the West bank, Gaza, Ukraine, Georgia and Kyrgyzstan, so Republicans have hatched this crazy idea of bringing democracy to the U.S. Senate. The devious plan consists of a minor rules change to allow up-or-down votes on Bush's nominations to the bench, some of them pending since the days Bob Byrd was filibustering Caesar's nominees in the Roman Senate. Teaching tribal warlords in Afghanistan the whys of rules changes to allow up-or-down votes on candidates may be a piece of cake, but it's a long, hard slog teaching liberal losers in Washington.
The GOP's explosive idea of bringing majority rule to the Senate is called the "Nuclear Option" in Washington. It's called the Nuclear Option because, if triggered, clean-shaven Warlord Harry Reid, who has obstructed Senate work on Cabinet nominees, judicial nominees, Social Security reform, tax reform, insurance reform, energy reform, environmental reform, school vouchers, faith-based initiatives, the Patriot Act, etc., etc., vows to obstruct Senate work.
"If they, for whatever reason, decide to do this, it's not only wrong, they will rue the day they did it, because we will do whatever we can to strike back," said Reid recently, laying on the charm. To win over Republicans, he sweetened his offer: "I know procedures around here. And I know that there will still be Senate business conducted. But I will, for lack of a better word, screw things up."
Or, put a little less subtly, if Republicans ram through their extremist idea of allowing votes in the Senate and obstructing the obstructionists, then the obstructionists will have no choice but to obstruct, building on the wildly successful strategy of Tom Daschle. Democrats like Barbara Boxer, who screamed purple-faced as sparks of fire leapt from her pores when she urged John Bolton to seek Anger Management, will go nuclear. Bush's wonderful working relationship with Harry Reid -- gone in a mushroom cloud! Who knows, even the New York Times may turn on the Republicans, calling them names. No more glowing editorials!
So, after losing Senate seats in Georgia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Florida, Louisiana and South Dakota, including a string of coveted seats on the Council of Deputy Assistant Dog-Catchers, the best idea Democrats come up with to win voters back is to threaten to spend the next four years reading names from a phone book on Senate time. They can't read the Constitution worth a lick, but give these clowns a phone book and they rattle off names like motor-mouths. They gripe that Republicans are taking away their most potent weapon for killing Judicial nominations -- the White Pages -- by invoking arcane rules, all to stifle the motor-mouths. One of those arcane rules is called Advice and Consent. Invoking it by ending Judicial filibusters breaks with cherished Democrat tradition of devouring freshly slaughtered nominees deemed unfit for the bench because of their "radical views" and chilling habits of reading the Bible and going to Church.
Sen. Joe Biden, weekly co-host of NBC's Meet The Press, CBS's Face The Nation, ABC's This Week, CNN's Late Edition and FNC's Fox News Sunday, noted on Fox News Sunday that the stalled nominees are stalled only because of their "radical views" and that Bible-reading and church-going have nothing to do with it. "It has nothing to do with the Bible," he hissed. The word "Radical", properly understood, means someone who disagrees with Joe Biden, according to Biden's Revised Unabridged Dictionary. Oh, sure, these "radicals" may come across as regular people -- just your average Michael Moore next door, or the Cynthia McKinney and Ramsey Clark you pass by in the grocery store.
Liberals -- who want judges to yank "Under God" from the Pledge of Allegiance, yank "In God We Trust" from money, free Gitmo inmates, kill the death penalty, ban wars, ban Nativity Scenes, ban all school prayer, ban school vouchers, legalize abortion vouchers, legalize cloning, legalize drugs, legalize gay marriage, protect kiddie-porn as free speech -- are very worried about judges with 'radical views'.
To show that religious beliefs have "nothing" to do with it and to thoroughly rebut charges they're going after people of faith, Democrats accuse Sen. Bill Frist of exploiting religion by taking part in a telecast for people of faith. Keep it up, buddy, and into the Lions' den you go! A brochure for the program, titled, Justice Sunday: Stop the Filibuster Against People of Faith, notes how the filibuster, once used by Bob Byrd to keep from having to sit next to blacks at lunch counters in the Roman Senate, "was once abused to protect racial bias, and now it is being used against people of faith." Sen. Charles Schumer went bananas. He says Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, which is sponsoring the conspiracy meeting, "has stepped over the line. He's said it's people of faith vs. Democrats." This Tony Perkins guy acts as if he were an equal! Sen. Dianne Feinstein went bananas, too. She blasted the planned gathering, warning that "it's a very dangerous, extreme thing. There is no telling what (the event) might launch." Howard Dean, another left-wing reject, is also furious about the event. He's preparing a thorough rebuttal, right from the Book of Job, in the New Testament.
William H. Pryor Jr., Janice Rogers Brown, Priscilla Owen, Thomas Griffith and Terrence Boyle are such dangerous radicals, the Senate would confirm them tomorrow. Same goes for David W. McLeague, Richard A. Griffin, Brett M. Kavanaugh, Henry W. Saad, Susan Bieke Neilson, William J. Haynes II, William G. Myers III. These twelve appellate nominees are called 'dangerous radicals' because they 1) stick to the U.S. Constitution and 2) don't look for guidance from the constitution of Rwanda. As far as constitutional issues go, the Appellate courts make most of the final rulings, which is why all twelve face possible Democrat filibusters. Ten of Bush's 34 appellate nominees were filibustered during his first term. It all shows Democrats are serious about setting a 'New Tone' in Washington.
During confirmation hearings, Democrats spent more than half the time asking William Pryor about that silly frailty of his -- his religious faith. As Alabama Attorney General, he prosecuted Chief Justice Roy Moore for not removing a Ten Commandments display from the courthouse. He saved the courthouse from Moses! For this, Democrats rewarded Pryor with a filibuster. He was later recess-appointed to the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta. Of course, denying the attacks on Pryor have anything to do with religion is as believable as denying the attacks on the Pope have anything to do with religion. As you know, liberals expressed shock that the new Pope is a devout Catholic.
When liberals are not attacking someone's faith, they attack just to irritate. Like the Bolton vote delay in committee Tuesday. They don't give a rip whether Bolton was nice and sweet to intelligence analysts or not -- they just wanna irritate Bush. Just like pests. In fact, they have PEST (Post Election Selection Trauma). That's why these bugs are so scared of Tom DeLay! He's the pest control guy, for crying out loud. Do cockroaches love the Orkin Man? The Washington Post wrote a big hit piece on DeLay the other day. The Ladybugs went wild! But the article went nowhere. The good news is, nobody gets rid of pests better than Delay. And come Nov. 2006, the pest problem will be solved.
Anyway, that's...
My Two Cents...
"JohnHuang2"
God bless and have a great weekend, y'all.
Harry REid---I just can't even say all I want to say about this gnat, because JR would prolly ban me--but, to say that Cheney using his RIGHT to vote in the Senate would be Bush's endorsment of ANYTHING is so bogus-
Cheney has every right to voice an opinion and/or vote, in case of a tie, so it is only right that he be apprised of any and all developements-----and for Cheney NOT to be able to voice his opinion, like Reid has, and Durbin, and Leahy, and Kennedy, and Kerry, kinda takes away his 1st Amendment right to speak, IMHO
For them to actually go on record as being outraged at what Cheney said today, tells me how low they consider the jobs they are being paid to do is---one cannot be proud of a job if one is always denigrating others that do the same thing.
Harry REid---I just can't even say all I want to say about this gnat, because JR would prolly ban me--but, to say that Cheney using his RIGHT to vote in the Senate would be Bush's endorsment of ANYTHING is so bogus-
Cheney has every right to voice an opinion and/or vote, in case of a tie, so it is only right that he be apprised of any and all developements-----and for Cheney NOT to be able to voice his opinion, like Reid has, and Durbin, and Leahy, and Kennedy, and Kerry, kinda takes away his 1st Amendment right to speak, IMHO
For them to actually go on record as being outraged at what Cheney said today, tells me how low they consider the jobs they are being paid to do is---one cannot be proud of a job if one is always denigrating others that do the same thing.
My apologies to the writer of the article. I misread it. The statement was Reid's and not the writer's.
Yes, and I am warning the Republicans. NOT one red cent until you bust the filibuster.
The worst part is that as RIDICULOUS as Harry's complaints are about this---HE won't be called down for it---he will, just like in the article, have other senators that back him up----
If a Rep. senator had said something this stupid, believe me, the rest of the Rep. senators would have not associated themselves with the remark AT ALL!
The dems keep talking about conservatives putting radical judges on the bench? Radical judges are already on the bench and that is the problem!
I can't tell you how disappointed I am in Harry Reid. Words fail.
Cheney is President of the Senate. While I'm not clear on the entirety of powers granted to him, I do know in instances of ties he has the right and duty to end the tie.
Unless President Bush walks into that chamber, slams the gavel, and declares the rule change himself, Reid hasn't a case.
Further, If Republicans knew how to act as a Majority Cheney wouldn't be needed to end debate, nor would the President have to campaign for his nominees. Clearly a loss of spine afflicts Senators with an "R" beside their name so The President, Cheney, Delay and the base have to drag them into the water kicking and screaming into doing the right thing.
when is that hyena, 'Harry Reid', up for reelection?
this thread needs The Seal , The Official Seal of the DemocRat Potty
Hey, Dems! Filibuster this ~ Bump!
Wow, very impressive! I LOVED your "2 cents" sound-off. You hit the bullseye, and you're giving Ann Coulter a run for her literary money! Might we get a picture of you?
The "author" is Nedra Pickel, the infamous AP "Reporterette" whose articles Rush occasionally reads and points out are editorials, laced with semi-truths and untruths, and lots of BS thrown in for good measure.
Carl Cameron on Fox said that Cheney was speaking as President of Senate--which pays his VP salary, BTW.
He says that Harry Reid said that President Bush LIED to him when he said that HE wasn't going to get involved.
He also said that Sen. Whip Mitch McConnell said they WILL have enough votes to vote in favor of the Constitution option...
From your keyboard to the polls. Have a great weekend too John...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.