"My old mom told me, 'Robert, you can't go to heaven if you hate anybody.' We practice that," Byrd said. "There are white niggers. I've seen a lot of white niggers in my time -- I'm going to use that word."
Posted on 05/26/2005 4:09:55 AM PDT by Molly Pitcher
There seem to be an awfully lot of opinions about the Filibuster Deal. This is because nobody really knows how it will work out in the end. They may think they do, however, and depending on where they are on a matrix in which the x-axis goes from liberal to conservative, and the y-axis from optimist to pessimist – depending on where they are on that matrix, they're either delighted or seriously wicked off.
The only guy who's got an independent reason not to like it is Bill Frist, because it got done without him and therefore stands as a rebuke to his leadership, no matter how it comes out in the end.
The only guy who's got an independent reason to like it is John McCain, because, alone among the fourteen Senators who signed the deal, he can take credit for it without worrying about constituents – right or left – who may think it's a travesty. McCain has his own constituency, all of whom see him as heroic, regardless of how it comes out in the end.
(By the way, isn't it interesting that Arlen Specter was not among the fourteen? Wouldn't you have thought he would be?)
Here's the best thing about the deal for Republicans. No matter what happens hereafter, there are three conservative judges, Ms. Owen, Ms. Brown and Mr. Pryor, who have been certified by seven Democratic Senators as not sufficiently awful to justify a filibuster.
How, I ask you, could they subsequently filibuster any of those three names if they were submitted as nominees for a Supreme Court vacancy?
In other words, President Bush has three solid conservative judges he can nominate for the next three Supreme Court vacancies and have seven moderate Democrats backed into a corner where they would pretty much have to vote for cloture on any filibuster, thereby assuring an up-and-down vote, which is all Bush ever asked for anyway.
I'm not saying he would nominate any of the three, but knowing he could will make negotiations on whomever he actually does want to nominate a whole lot easier.
"You think my nominating Alberto Gonzalez to the Court is a filibuster-worthy 'extraordinary circumstance?' Well, geez, I guess you've got me; I'll have to nominate Janice Rogers Brown instead."
Oh, throw me in that briar patch.
Here's the worst thing about the deal for Republicans: the filibuster lives on. In pre-deal discussions with several of the party faithful, I heard the argument that "we ought to be careful about what we do, because someday we'll probably be in the minority again."
Yeah, probably. But so what? The filibuster is a) a bad idea, and b) pretty much the exclusive property of the Democrats. Quick, name one successful Republican filibuster of anything.
Democrats perfected the filibuster in their attempts to keep civil rights legislation from passing Congress. They got away with it for decades. The whole New Deal was segregated because of the filibuster threat; FDR wouldn't even put anti-lynching legislation forward for fear of the Theodore Bilbos of the world. This period also represents the time when the news media became a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Democratic Party, so they did nothing to put the heat on, and Democrats were still filibustering civil rights legislation in the 1960's, when, thanks to Republicans, the impasse was finally beaten, with the result that African-Americans got first class citizenship at long last. (Remember, Republicans had tried to give it to them in the 1860's.)
And don't let the Jimmy Stewart thing influence your view of the filibuster. That was fiction. In the real world, nothing wholesome like Mr. Smith's filibuster ever happened, and it never will. Liberal Hollywood created that myth because their Democratic brethren needed an iconic view of the filibuster – and still do. Photos of Stewart, in his Mr. Smith role, were on display in the Senate chamber last week.
The Constitution doesn't envision the filibuster, and the Senate doesn't need it to perform its famous "saucer" function: it has many other parliamentary ways to cool down the hot beverages sent over by the raucous House. If you think the filibuster is a conservative vehicle, then how is it that the Senate has been demonstrably the more liberal of the two houses, filibuster and all, for at least forty years?
The filibuster is a useless tool for the Republicans, because they haven't the nerve to use it, and never have. The reason behind this timidity is, of course, media bias. A Republican filibuster would be the object of such intense media pressure that it could not possibly succeed. A Democratic "nuclear option" would never be called that, and never regarded as a radical trashing of tradition. It would be, instead, a noble reform.
Which, indeed, it is, and Republicans have lost that reform attempt, in return for which we the people will get some very excellent judges.
Worth it? I guess it depends on where you are on the liberal/conservative/ optimist/pessimist matrix.
The democrats have taught the Republican moderates (socialists) how to heel.
Next they will learn to fetch.
RIGHT ON!!!
Interesting how the MSM has forgotten that it was Democrats who filibustered civil rights laws, and that it was Republicans who made the enactment of those laws possible.
You are 100% wrong about Sen. Frist! It was his leadership that got Judge Owen confirmed. McCain merely "kicked" the after touchdown conversion. The next set of plays will be quarterbacked by Frist. Johnny M will be on the bench wishing he were calling the plays.
Of course, as a card-carrying FReeper, I have to have at least one quibble... The filibuster is a useless tool for the Republicans, because they haven't the nerve to use it, and never have. The reason behind this timidity is, of course, media bias.
Right or wrong, I hope and pray that "media bias" is not the only reason. I expect the Republicans I support to have foremost in their mind THE CONSTITUTION - what it actually says, and what our Founders meant. If they don't like it, they must AMEND it, not skirt it.
This is not the way all of them behave, for sure, but that is the guiding principle I wish them to exhibit - and in this specific case, I would expect them to refuse to filibuster on Constitutional principle.
But because I believe it will fall apart within a month, I conclude that the Compromise was both stupid and mildly amusing, but not terribly bad.
Congressman Billybob
McCain simply unplugged the cord while the filibuster was being strapped into the electric chair forcing an unauthorized stay of it's forthcoming death.
Amen to your post.
They only needed seven republicans (44 democrats + seven republicans = 51 no's on an up or down vote). Specter is insurance, and there are probably others.
That's the first I'v eheard of Theodore Bilbos. I'll have to do some reading...my liberal friends deny that Dems block civil rights legislation.
They only needed seven republicans (44 democrats + seven republicans = 51 no's on an up or down vote). Specter is insurance, and there are probably others......FRISTS' STOCK WOULD REALLY RISE, IF HE COULD PEEL OFF 2DEMS. GET BACK TO 51 AND LEAVE THE COWARDLY 7 DANGLING IN THE BREEZE!
Put me solidly in quadrant 4...
"My old mom told me, 'Robert, you can't go to heaven if you hate anybody.' We practice that," Byrd said. "There are white niggers. I've seen a lot of white niggers in my time -- I'm going to use that word."
Emerging demographic patterns suggest we won't be in the minority again, at least not in the Senate. Even if the Democrats regain a majority it is unlikely the Senate will ever return to the Democrat juggernaut decades of the 30s, 40s, 60s, 70s, and 80s. I believe the Democrats know this even if they dare not speak it.
Easy, Jay. They're DEMOCRATS. Who'll call them out on it?
Remember that Scalia was confirmed in his present seat 98-0. Think that would make him a shoo-in for Chief?
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.