Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Why is lameduck Chafee Simply Not Removed from the Senate Foreign Relations Cmte? [Bolton Confirm]
11/13/2006 | avoiding_sulla

Posted on 11/13/2006 10:26:59 PM PST by Avoiding_Sulla

Why is Lincoln Chafee Now Simply Not Removed from the Senate Foreign Relations Commuttee?

Assuming another lame duck Senator doesn't decide to play snake, Bolton's appointment to the UN then finally passes passes out of committee on a 9 to 8 vote.

Why not? If Robert Byrd wanted to do something nobody ever heard of while his party was in the majority, he'd unearth some parliamentary maneuver to get the job done.

Even the stupid party can't ignore factual procedures thrust in their face -- unless they don't want to hear it.

C'mon. There must be a way to do this.

What is it?


TOPICS: Government; Your Opinion/Questions
KEYWORDS: bolton; confirmations; congress; parliamentarytricks
C'mon FReepers. Put those gray cells to work
1 posted on 11/13/2006 10:27:02 PM PST by Avoiding_Sulla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Avoiding_Sulla

Because our Senate leadership has no backbone for starters!


2 posted on 11/13/2006 10:29:50 PM PST by PhiKapMom ( Go Sooners! Thanks Aggies for your 12th Man!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Avoiding_Sulla

It wouldn't matter. Even if he was removed, or Chafee voted for him, passing out of committee isn't enough, you have to pass the full Senate.

And the D's will do what they did last time, filibuster while claiming they aren't filibustering. And this time, they won't have to do it long.


3 posted on 11/13/2006 10:31:49 PM PST by zbigreddogz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Avoiding_Sulla

paging Rush Limbaugh!


4 posted on 11/13/2006 10:33:01 PM PST by John Lenin (The most dangerous place for a child in America is indeed in its mother's womb)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: zbigreddogz

I thought I made it clear I knew the full senate has to vote. It would still be a grand thing to see pulled off.

Are you saying that there's really nothing stopping Chafee's late session removal?


5 posted on 11/13/2006 10:35:24 PM PST by Avoiding_Sulla (You can't see where we're going when you don't look where we've been.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: PhiKapMom

Are you saying that there's really nothing stopping Chafee's late session removal?


6 posted on 11/13/2006 10:35:37 PM PST by Avoiding_Sulla (You can't see where we're going when you don't look where we've been.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Avoiding_Sulla

It doesn't matter. He'd still be blocked on the senate floor.

The lack of majority rule in the senate has been frustrating these past 4 years, but we'll learn to appreciate this fact of life over the next two years. Pelosi may be able to ram through anything she wants in the House, but it will come to a dead stop in the Senate.


7 posted on 11/13/2006 10:36:11 PM PST by Omega Man II
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Omega Man II
It doesn't matter. He'd still be blocked on the senate floor.

Not if Frist grew some balls. Nuclear option.

8 posted on 11/13/2006 10:38:44 PM PST by Octar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Omega Man II

I'd say we all know what is likely in front of the full senate. But this time Bolton has a track record the Dems will find hard embarrassing to deride.

And that's a good thing, isn't it?

Are you saying that there's really nothing stopping Chafee's late session removal?


9 posted on 11/13/2006 10:39:52 PM PST by Avoiding_Sulla (You can't see where we're going when you don't look where we've been.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Octar

That only applies to judicial nominees. Getting rid of the filibuster entirely would be a disaster to the republic.


10 posted on 11/13/2006 10:40:36 PM PST by perfect_rovian_storm
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Octar
Not if Frist grew some balls. Nuclear option.

You honestly want to destroy the filibuster rule right before we're about to become the minority party? Over Bolton??? Hillary may be President in two years, and we might still be in the minority in the senate, but the filibuster rule will be enough to stop some of her loonier ideas and nominees.

11 posted on 11/13/2006 10:41:19 PM PST by Omega Man II
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Octar
Nuclear option.

You want to get rid of the filibuster rule when we will be in the minority for the next 4 years.

12 posted on 11/13/2006 10:45:15 PM PST by staytrue (Tancredo/Buchanan for 2008-All RINOS MUST GO)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Avoiding_Sulla
Are you saying that there's really nothing stopping Chafee's late session removal?

I don't know the answer. I'd assume it'd be much harder to remove someone from a committee in the senate than it would be in the House. My understanding is it takes a 2/3rd vote to organize the senate and set committee ratios. The Republicans could even refuse to allow the Democrats to reorganize next year and take over the committees - because of the 2/3 rule. (but they won't)

13 posted on 11/13/2006 10:46:11 PM PST by Omega Man II
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Avoiding_Sulla

Backbone of leadership and not worth the hassle would be my guess.


14 posted on 11/13/2006 10:49:14 PM PST by PhiKapMom ( Go Sooners! Thanks Aggies for your 12th Man!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Omega Man II

Ruth Bader Ginsburg was voted in 96 to 3. I hope the Republicans will give the Dems a hard time should the Dems get the presidency in 2008, but going by past performance, I'm not holding my breath.


15 posted on 11/13/2006 10:52:43 PM PST by beaversmom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Avoiding_Sulla
'C'mon. There must be a way to do this."
Of course there is. Have him locked up in a bathroom [locks can malfunction, you know] at the vote time. Simple and easy.
16 posted on 11/13/2006 10:57:19 PM PST by GSlob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Avoiding_Sulla

Damned good question. And the hell with the naysayers on this thread. No good deed is ever lost. If the GOP shows backbone on this one, it's a nice way to start the new Congress, isn't it?


17 posted on 11/13/2006 11:08:15 PM PST by California Patriot ("That's not Charlie the Tuna out there. It's Jaws." -- Richard Nixon)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Avoiding_Sulla

Darn good question.


18 posted on 11/13/2006 11:09:08 PM PST by Lancey Howard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Avoiding_Sulla

Probably not, but if he can't make it through the full Senate, who really cares? It's a waste of time.

If we are going to try to pull something during the lame duck session, we should do whatever we can to force the tax cuts to be made permenent. That would be a lot more useful then a mastubatory move to push Bolton through committee when he can't credibly get a floor vote.


19 posted on 11/13/2006 11:13:31 PM PST by zbigreddogz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: California Patriot
Oh my yes. But it would also evoke the question: "What took you so long?" The usual answer, "better late than never," probably wouldn't go over too well. I think it better not to answer.
20 posted on 11/13/2006 11:56:53 PM PST by Avoiding_Sulla (You can't see where we're going when you don't look where we've been.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: zbigreddogz

I don't think a floor vote would be as tough on the GOP as on the Dems this time.

The UN has never been at a lower approval rating than now.

Bolton has a track record that is well in line with that sentiment.

Hence the Dems will it find at best embarrassing to deride him, and would put more strength behind the newly elected (allegedly) conservative Blue Dogs.

Which, in turn, might help skuttle some of Pelosi's projected wingnut committee chair designees.


Those are all good things to fight for, aren't they?

I think this is one of those rare times that thinking outside the box really can pay off.


21 posted on 11/14/2006 12:06:10 AM PST by Avoiding_Sulla (You can't see where we're going when you don't look where we've been.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Lancey Howard

Well then, start passing this question around.

How about hitting the talkshows tomorrow with this question?

I'm not sure Bill Bennett is up on procedures like this -- but he has connections and could find out.

Laura Ingraham is probably our best bet. Is there a live thread for her show? Why not ask this question and see how far it runs. If it doesn't get ducked perhaps there's hope.


22 posted on 11/14/2006 12:10:01 AM PST by Avoiding_Sulla (You can't see where we're going when you don't look where we've been.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Avoiding_Sulla

It's never too late.


23 posted on 11/14/2006 12:34:08 AM PST by California Patriot ("That's not Charlie the Tuna out there. It's Jaws." -- Richard Nixon)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: California Patriot

Well, you're with me them. We'd sure like an answer to the question.

See post 22.


24 posted on 11/14/2006 12:39:12 AM PST by Avoiding_Sulla (You can't see where we're going when you don't look where we've been.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: zbigreddogz

Before the election, the Dems agreed to let Bolton get confirmed. He was going to get confirmed and everyone knew it. Chaffee scuttled it.


25 posted on 11/14/2006 12:56:18 AM PST by nickcarraway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway

That makes the question considerably more significant.

Do you know the answer?


26 posted on 11/14/2006 1:14:13 AM PST by Avoiding_Sulla (You can't see where we're going when you don't look where we've been.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Avoiding_Sulla

Sounds good to me. Or, they could make them fillibuster for real-through Christmas. That would require back-bone so I doubt it would ever happen.


27 posted on 11/14/2006 1:18:30 AM PST by Pajamajan (Pray for president Bush-pray for our military-pray for our congresss-pray for our nation)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Avoiding_Sulla

Because the GOP and Bush don't operate that way. They don't play hardball with people like Chaffee.


28 posted on 11/14/2006 2:25:36 AM PST by nickcarraway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Avoiding_Sulla

The U.N. isn't on anyone's top ten list of concerns, Democrat or Republican. The vast, silent majority doesn't know who John Bolton is and doesn't care.

There will be good fights in the next two years, but it'd be criminally inept to stake much energy on this lost cause. Save your tinder for what's to come.


29 posted on 11/14/2006 3:12:48 AM PST by libertylover76
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: GSlob

I simply do not understand why we send anyone to the UN.

Sure it's great to have a Bolton, but if we can't have him and the demoncrats filibuster - then fine - let it be known - loud and clear - that unless Bolton gets appointed we won't name anyone, and the position remains unfilled.
That should tick off the liberals, but I doubt if anyone else would mind.
Same philosophy goes for the judges too. Give my appointments a full Senate vote or the slots stay vacant. And keep sending one conservative judge up for a vote after another.


30 posted on 11/14/2006 3:48:12 AM PST by A'elian' nation (ts)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: zbigreddogz

Did I read a post stating there were three newly elected Dem's who ran on a conservative ticket? Anti abortion, pro-gun,
anti homosexual.

If there is such as these three would they lean to the right?


31 posted on 11/14/2006 5:24:49 AM PST by buck61
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway
Hardball is politics that roams from putting the target between a rock and a hard place to giving the target an offer he can't refuse.

But this is about enforcement. Chafee is a complete lame duck. He can't retaliate in the next Congress. He is defanged -- except for the Bolton blockage.

Some on this thread make this removal seem like a big thing. Others seem to think is really is small -- but nevertheless consequential even for those who don't like the UN.

So it appears that the only thing Chafee has to offer at this time is the blocking of Bolton.

So, let's ask: Does the GOP leadership really want Bolton blocked? It seems that however unlikely that thought appears, it's probabity increases every day Chafee stays in a position to block Bolton from leaving committee without a full explanation for Chafee remaining.

32 posted on 11/14/2006 10:52:51 AM PST by Avoiding_Sulla (You can't see where we're going when you don't look where we've been.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Avoiding_Sulla

President Bush pulled out all the stops for Chaffee, and basically did more for him then any other Senator this election cycle. Isn't reasonable to think that he would ask Chaffee to do something for him. Basically Chaffee did not feel he had to do anything for Bush in return for what Bush did for him.


33 posted on 11/14/2006 2:27:41 PM PST by nickcarraway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Avoiding_Sulla

Easy. Call in a hit from the Sopranos!


34 posted on 11/14/2006 2:30:25 PM PST by Doc Savage ("You couldn't tame me, but you taught me.................")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Avoiding_Sulla
I asked the same question two days ago and never got an answer.

I thought we had the floor votes and the only thing holding Bolton back was Chafee. I figured Chafee would bargain for a do-nothing ambassadorship to the south sea islands in exchange for his release of the Bolton nomination. Chafee is surely the biggest dolt on the planet.

Chafee was outspoken in his desire to leave the Republican party. On those grounds alone I would think he could be removed. Don't know the answer though.
35 posted on 11/14/2006 2:39:53 PM PST by Republican Red (if you don't want to root for the home team then get the hell out of the stadium)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Doc Savage
Now that could be tough to do.
Do you know much about the "machine" in Providence? The wiseguys there are a bit lower key than elsewhere; one needs not be loud when one can keep their home turf running without fear of outside interference.

I.e., Chafee is almost certainly a made man.

And if that is why nobody dares remove him, we're in deeper yogurt than anybody is aware.

36 posted on 11/14/2006 3:09:40 PM PST by Avoiding_Sulla (You can't see where we're going when you don't look where we've been.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Avoiding_Sulla

I just sent this thread to Rush....maybe he will comment on it the next couple of days????


37 posted on 11/14/2006 3:11:11 PM PST by HarleyLady27 (My ? to libs: "Do they ever shut up on your planet?" "Grow your own DOPE: Plant a LIB!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: HarleyLady27

Please keep us posted. It would be a good thing to get this question answered and then see where that leads us. Maybe nowhere -- but even that has the advantage of letting us know where we stand.


38 posted on 11/14/2006 3:17:09 PM PST by Avoiding_Sulla (You can't see where we're going when you don't look where we've been.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Avoiding_Sulla

Send his a$$ to Texas...we don't like yogurt either!!! (grins)..we'll get ole Pedro from Farmers Branch...he is pi$$ed...and to get a LIN-Connn....


39 posted on 11/14/2006 3:29:04 PM PST by RVN Airplane Driver ("To be born into freedom is an accident; to die in freedom is an obligation..POW input)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Avoiding_Sulla

My Senator, who sits in the Big Chair up front and swings the Big Gavel for a few more weeks, says that Congress works more on personal networking than on political majorities. Although chairmen and some committee memberships will be changing, the working relations will change only slightly. Congress is still divided nearly 50-50 and will continue so after the new ones are sworn in.


40 posted on 11/14/2006 3:34:49 PM PST by RightWhale (RTRA DLQS GSCW)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway

Nope they give them important committee assignments to keep them in the GOP...Chaffee has never been a republican and we didn't need him this last time around...they should have dumped him before now...Specter too. Lots of help he was.


41 posted on 11/15/2006 8:39:50 AM PST by Les_Miserables
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson