Posted on 07/27/2007 10:50:38 PM PDT by neverdem
Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) declared that his decision not to lead a successful filibuster in January 2006 of Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito's nomination was one of his "greatest failings" as a senator.
In an address to liberal legal scholars of the American Constitution Society, Schumer said that after watching the work of the newly constructed "Roberts court" the past 18 months, he would block any future Supreme Court nominee of President Bush's should a vacancy arise between now and January 2009.
Schumer's address covered his views on the confirmation processes for Alito and Chief Justice John Roberts. Conservatives have hailed Roberts and Alito for their rulings and generally have said that their confirmations may prove to be the single lasting legacy of President Bush's second term.
But Schumer and liberals were alarmed by many of the 5-4 rulings that went...
--snip--
"Every day, I am pained that I didn't do more to try to block Justice Alito. Every two years, I look back and take stock of my greatest failings and regrets in the past Congress. Without question, my greatest regret in the 109th Congress was not doing more to block Alito. Alito shouldn't have been confirmed. I should have done a better job; my colleagues said we didn't have the votes, but I think we should have twisted more arms and done more."
--snip--
"We should reverse the presumption of confirmation. The Supreme Court is dangerously out of balance. We cannot afford to see Justice Stevens replaced by another Roberts; or Justice Ginsburg by another Alito. Given the track record of this President and the experience of obfuscation at the hearings, with respect to the Supreme Court, at least: I will recommend to my colleagues that we should not confirm a Supreme Court nominee EXCEPT in extraordinary circumstances."
(Excerpt) Read more at blog.washingtonpost.com ...
Unfortunately, I must LIVE with all your failings every single day of the year.
I regret that Schumer looks like a smiling pez machine.
What he fails to understand is that he doesn’t have the right to filibuster judicial nominees. Or is it the case that his personal feelings or quest for power are more important than the Constitution.
Meadow Muffin
Schumer must walk around with nails in his underwear. He always seems to be pricked by something.
I would say this statement should be used by the Republicans to say Chuck Schumer should be taken off the committee. He has made up his mind on all nominees before they are even nominated.
This is also an intimidation tactic to Roberts, Alito, and other justices to vote my way or you will pay. Look for Schumer and Durbin to lead impeachment procedings against them if they don’t start voting liberal on key cases.
What about the independent judiciary chucky!!
Schumer is an idiot. He must think that any day his mouth stops moving is a bad one.
Two of the greatest successes of Bush’s presidency are Roberts and Alito.
He must think if he closes his mouth the backside won't have flow. In his case, there is a connection.
I regret not being adopted by the Rockefellers. I regret not winning a Powerball. I regret not dating Gillian Anderson. Hell, I regret all the junk food I’ve eaten. Is Mr. Schumer truly that stupid, or does he think the nutroots are?
But that’s the thing. These people have elevated the opposition to doing ANYTHING....and the only barrier is if they can get away with it. No constitution, no tradition, no fairness.
If only they’d put the same zeal in fighting the terrorists.
Well, obviously, because he is not worried about the middle, he is worried about his base. This betrays much about the current state of affairs among American leftists.
Why is he concerned for the base? I think it is because the base of the Democrat party is either out of control or, conversely, utterly under the control of one man, George Soros. Either the mob at moveon.org and Daily Kos have so utterly intimidated elected Democrats that those Democrats are more concerned with mollifying their extremists, or something else is afoot. These two possibilities are only superficially inconsistent because George Soros indirectly controls these bloggers.
Have a look at FrontPagemagazine.com and look at our articles describing how George Soros has seized control of so much of the Democrat party. I think it is entirely possible that Schumer routinely gets his marching orders from George Soros. It is now becoming more and more apparent how extremely left-wing Soros really is. He clearly regards Republicans in general and the Bush administration in particular to be the equivalent of Nazis. He has stated that he would gladly gave his fortune to have seen George Bush defeated. What would he give to see George Bush's legacy of judicial appointments undone?
I think Soros can direct people like Schumer either by stirring up the bloggers or by dropping the word to those who must go to him with begging bowl in hand.
I also think that George Soros is becoming a real and present danger to American democracy.
I met Charles Schumer once. He is a certified MORON of the highest order. What a complete hack this clown is.
I met Charles Schumer once. He is a certified MORON of the highest order. What a complete hack this clown is. He has guys walking ahead of him asking if you’d like to speak with him . Then they write down what you’d like to ask him and they pick only questions that he has pre written answers for . I protested and he came over . He TOTALLY avoided my question and gave a nonsensical answer . I watched as they filtered out any people who might actually throw him a tough question. They actually physically block people from him who are asking legit questions that they DON’T want to deal with ..He always has that insane , idiot smile plastered on his phony ass face.
The Dems know that a HUGE portion of their base is either fanatical or ignorant and that they can get away with almost anything . The sheeple follow the Dems without question. They are so blind in their vengeance against Bush that they accept everything and anything the party does.The Dems leaders know this and take full advantage of their ignorant base. You surely don’t think the Dem leadership actually believes half of what they say do you ? I’m sure that behind closed doors the Dem leadership must laugh their asses off over how stupid their loyal followers actually are.
sorry for the double post.Not quite sure how I did that ..Oh well, back to bed.
You surely did not read my post, did you?
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
YES!
Ditto on Soros. He wont accomplish much by refusing to confirm, because it will accentuate conservative clout. He must be assuming a Dem president in 08.
If you get a chance take a look at the video whose link appears at the foot of this page:http://www.freecongress.org/
It takes a while to load but well worth it not the least because it amplifies and applies you insights to modern times.
Schumer and George Soros have convinced themselves that they know what is best, and that they are the “mainstream.” They are probably wrong, but don’t underestimate your enemies.
Keep in mind that Schumer's audience is the American Constitution Society, which was recently created as an answer/offset to the Federalist Society, which now has 4 members on SCOTUS.
The dems have identified the Federalist Society as the cornerstone of the VRWC. The dems have also recognized that while there are actual card carrying members of the Fed Soc, there are also stealth federalists such as Judge Janice Brown and AG Alberto Gonzales. Whenever you see the dems try to prevent confirmation of a Bush nominee, or attack one of Bush's employees, the underlying justification for their action(tho they won't admit it) is the individual's membership, or stealth membership, in the Federalist Society.
Social Conservatives tend to look at these Judges in light of social issues such as abortion, and the dems do also. But the dems have a much wider conspiracy theory involving the VRWC and the Feddies.
The dems think that the GOP is using the Free Trade Agreements(NAFTA, CAFTA, the bilaterals, and eventually FTAA) to establish a Western Hemispheric wide set of regulatory laws that is in direct conflict with the regulatory laws that the dems have established in the US beginning with FDR and the New Deal. Their theory is that once the GOP has the hemispheric reg laws in place, a SCOTUS with 5 Feddies will rule that all the dem's reg laws in the US are un-constitutional. You will often hear the dems say that Bush, the GOP, the VRWC, and/or the Federalist Society are trying to "roll back the New Deal" or "roll back the 20th century".
This is why the dems have told Bush that he will have to re-negotiate the pending FTAs with Peru, Columbia, Panama, and S. Korea to include regulatory protections for the unions, the environment, and social justice. If the dems can take the presidency next year, they will try to re-write NAFTA and CAFTA to include the same protections.
I regret that a loser such as Schumer was elected and the country has to suffer for his stupidity.
Free Republic needs a score card to help in the battle of the liberals vs consevatives.
When the Libes make or do things it is from a different set of rules they judge themselves by.
Where as if the consevatives make or do things they are judge by the old school.
So the liberals are never held responsible such as Jefferson and the loot or others.
But the conservatives are to be held to the Liberal standards and when the the Liberals do something the conservaties are to turn a blind eye!
But I still like to see a score card to show how inconsistant the Liberals are!
Mad Magazine used to run a feature called “Scenes we’d like to see.” Here is a mythical newspaper lead I would like to see.
Washington-—In a surprise move, White House Press Secretary Tony Snow announced today that President Bush has promised to nominate Sen. Charles Schumer (D-New York) to the next vacancy on the U.S. Supreme Court. Snow explained that the president’s nomination of Schumer was conditioned upon the Democrats’ promise to block all Supreme Court nominations made by the president.
Is this really news?
Sure he said it out loud. But did anyone think the Dems with their new majority, would confirm ANY of Bush’s appointments?
"As of 2004, an alphabetical list of Shadow Party groups included the following: Air America Radio; America Coming Together; America Votes; American Constitution Society; American Federation of Labor - Congress of Industrial Organizations; American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees; American Federation of Teachers; Anshell Media; Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now; Association of Trial Lawyers of America; Band of Progressives; Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence; Campaign for a Progressive Future; Campaign for America's Future; Center for American Progress; Clean Water Action; Communication Workers of America; The Constitution Project; DASH PAC; Defenders of Wildlife Action Fund; Democracy for America; Democratic Governors Associations; Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee; Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee; Dog Eat Dog Films; EMILY's List; Environment 2004; Gore/Lieberman Recount Committee; Hotel Employees & Restaurant Employees International Union; the Human Rights Campaign; INdTV; International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers; Joint Victory Campaign 2004; Laborers International Union of North American; League of Conservation Voters; New Democrat Network; The Media Fund; Media Matters for America; Million Mom March; Moving America Forward; MoveOn.org; Music for America; National Association for the Advancement of Colored People; NARAL Pro-Choice America; National Education Association; National Grassroots Alliance; National Jewish Democratic Council; National Treasury Employees Union; New American Optimists; New Democrat Network; Partnership for America's Families; People for the American Way; Phoenix Group; Planned Parenthood; Pro-Choice Vote; Service Employees International Union; Sheet Metal Workers International Association; Sierra Club; The Thunder Road Group; United Food & Commercial Workers Union; United Progressive Alliance; USAction; Vagina Votes; Voices for Working Families; Vote for Change; Young Voter Alliance; and 21st Century Democrats."
http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/groupProfile.asp?grpid=6706
It looks like you are way ahead of the curve
“Schumer is an idiot.”
Politically, he’s one of the most intelligent people in D.C. He’s been in politics since the first day he left school (Harvard Law). He is 100% political animal whose own quest for power supercedes any duty he should uphold as a senator.
Basically, he’s a really crafty dirtbag (I have other words for him that I cannot post here :)).
This is a terrible failing on Schumer's part. Away with this "confession" act as if that matters. He flat out screwed the pooch, and I for one don't accept this apology.
The only penance I'll accept is his resignation.
Upchuck Schumer, the swimmer, Robert KKK Byrd, Lurch, leaky leachy are the poster boys for term limits in the US Senate.
“This is why the dems have told Bush that he will have to re-negotiate the pending FTAs with Peru, Columbia, Panama, and S. Korea to include regulatory protections for the unions, the environment, and social justice.”
That’s certainly interesting speculation on your part - the rats don’t want international scumbag bureaucrats writing illegal law because the rats want to protect federal bureaucrat sumbags illegally writing law.
If you can provide any links to your speculation, I’d be most interested in reading it.
I find the whole matter of bureaucrats illegally writing law an affront to our right to vote, via the ballot box, for representatives to write law. In fact, I consider bureaucrats writing law to be a crime of sedition, and judges and legislators who allow it need to suffer the most severe punishment allowed by law.
While this is typical radical Schumer, the undercurrent of the article is the foreshadow aspect of it...
He’s worried about Justice Stevens.
Three words Senator:
Janice Rogers Brown
It would take years to build a huge ground swell of support but the only way to deal with this morass of
bureaucratic crap that Washington has become is to have
a third constitutional convention with everything of the old order completely pitched out and rewritten. Everything
starts clean with historical lessons learned and relearned!
I suspect it will take another civil war to achieve it. The hillarites won’t go away quietly!
It’s already stated in our constitution that only legislators, duly elected by the people, may write law. There’s no exception for these damn bureaucrats. Bureaucrats writing law is one of the signature features of a dictatorship - the soviets in the former USSR and the functionairies in fascist Germany, being two recent examples.
And you’re right, it will take years to build support, but the process can be quickened by challenging these bureaucrat dictators in court by refusing to follow any decrees or dictates issued by these Marxist bureaucracies. There is simply no constitutional basis allowing an unelected lackey hired by the government to write law.
People need a basic civic lesson that only elected representatives may write law.
Sounds like an admission of incompotence to me.
Schmuckie’s latest hand-wringing over the Alito appointment leads me to think there’s another SCOTUS retirement in the works.
He and his henchmen in the senate make me sick.
Why Schumer hasn’t been tried for Treason yet is beyond me...
I would love to see Janice Rogers Brown on SCOTUS.
In 1993 and 1994, respectively, Orrin G. Hatch, senior “Republican” at the time on the Senate Judiciary Committee, cosponsored his friend “Bill” Clinton’s nominations of Ruth Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer. Is Orrin still waiting for the Dems to thank him for his “broad-mindedness”?
There are no term limits in the U.S. Senate because the people don’t want term limits. That wanted Byrd, Rockefeller, Thurmond, EMK, Stevens, Bentsen, and some of the other long-termers.
That's why we need term limits.
Do you believe in term limits for Congress?
Despite a recent House vote against it, talk radio is still being threatened by the resurrection of the Fairness Doctrine. With the near evisceration of McCain - Feingold Campaign Finance Reform Act by the Supreme Court and the failure of the comprehensive "Shamnesty" in the Senate, the neoCOMs will be pushing harder for the Fairness Doctrine. Call talk radio. Use that as an opening to push for a Constitutional Amendment to give Congress term limits.
That might be the smartest post I’ve read yet. Care to speculate who will step down? Ginsburg? John Paul Stevens?
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.