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

To: RWR8189
I find it highly doubtful that the Demolibs will filibuster.

First, at least two Republican members of the "Gang of Fourteen" have openly stated they would not support a filbuster. DeWine is up for re-election next year, and his son's defeat in Ohio after the first Gang of Fourteen fiasco sent a clear message from Ohio voters they aren't going to put up with any more nonsense from him. Graham is up for re-election in '08, and he has no doubt gotten an earful from his constituency. Even if every other Gang of Fourteen member sides with the Dems, that leaves a 50-50 tie on the Consitutional Option, with Cheney's vote the tie-breaker. Bye-bye filibuster.

Given that, the Dems won't want to waste the filibuster fight on someone who would only replace a relatively conservative Justice. With the distinct possibility of Stevens and/or Ginsburg retiring, they'd be much wiser to save the big fight for that nomination, which would have a far larger impact on the right-left makeup of the Court. My gut tells me Ginsburg and Stevens will try to hang on at least until after the '06 elections, if not those in '08, hoping the Dems will pick up enough seats to regain control of the house (or regain the Presidency in '08) or at least make the Constitutional Option impossible.

I think we'll hear the required whining and moaning and smearing by the Demolibs, after which Alito will be confirmed by a comfortable margin.

34 posted on 11/02/2005 7:18:32 AM PST by krazyrep (Demolib Playbook Rule #2: If you can't beat 'em, filibuster. If that doesn't work, go to court.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: krazyrep
I find it highly doubtful that the Demolibs will filibuster.

It does look less likely, as more people speak up for this very well-chosen nominee. Well done, Mr. Bush!

35 posted on 11/02/2005 9:16:16 AM PST by Dick Holmes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies ]

To: krazyrep
I keep hearing about Stevens and Ginsburg holding on until at least the '06 elections and possibly '08 in the hopes of Democrat gains in Congress or possibly a Democrat president. I find it interesting that no one points out how risky a personal and political strategy that is, particularly for Stevens, who was appointed by a Republican president (ok, maybe it doesn't mean that much to him after all). How would you like your legacy to be that you held on to your court seat, in failing health and against the wishes of your friends and family, for the sheer partisan notion of having your seat filled by someone of similar POLITICAL leanings? Let's say the strategy backfires and Republicans keep their majority in '06 AND win the '08 presidential election (not entirely far-fetched, is it?) Your Stevens or Ginsburg, now what do you do... retire right away and make it obvious that your a partisan hack, and a loser of one at that, or just stay on until you die and not give a hoot since you'll never have to listen to what the public says about you anyway? Don't get me wrong, i'm not saying that Stevens and Ginsburg aren't above this strategy, just pointing out the possible pitfalls.
38 posted on 11/02/2005 12:41:21 PM PST by marktd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies ]

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