Free Republic

The Bush administration said yesterday that Democratic senators should not expect to get the documents they are seeking before they will allow an up-or-down vote on John R. Bolton... "They have what they need," White House spokesman Scott McClellan said. "The Democratic and Republican leaders of the Intelligence Committee have had access to this sensitive, highly classified information. The Democrats clamoring for it have already voted against the nomination. This is about partisan politics." ...The documents sought by Democratic Sens. Joseph R. Biden Jr. of Delaware and Christopher J. Dodd of Connecticut are e-mail messages and other background material for...

Democrats lost the evangelical vote decades ago. As the last election showed, they are now in danger of permanently losing Catholics. But the left has devised an ingenious technique for winning back disaffected Catholics – insult their Church and its leader. And they thought of this all by themselves? As part of the campaign to defeat the Republican push to end the judicial filibuster, on May 17, 2005, MoveOn.org, PAC ran an ad appealing to anti-Catholic paranoia. The broadside was an altered photo that showed Pope Benedict XVI standing outside the Supreme Court’s chambers. The pontiff appears to be holding...

Blood on the Potomac    On May 23rd in a scene reminiscent of Caesar's assassination seven backstabbers on the Republican side committed an act of betrayal worthy of Brutus. We might as well remember this day as the Ides of May. The left as it has for most of history has shown it is more adept at power politics than the center and right. Next to Brutus, Benedict Arnold and other famous traitors we may now add the name of John McCain. The left was looking for a fiddle to play and they found a violin in John McCain.  ...

Alabama: Sessions (R-AL), Yea Shelby (R-AL), Yea Alaska: Murkowski (R-AK), Yea Stevens (R-AK), Present, Giving Live Pair Arizona: Kyl (R-AZ), Yea McCain (R-AZ), Yea Arkansas: Lincoln (D-AR), Nay Pryor (D-AR), Nay California: Boxer (D-CA), Nay Feinstein (D-CA), Nay Colorado: Allard (R-CO), Yea Salazar (D-CO), Nay Connecticut: Dodd (D-CT), Nay Lieberman (D-CT), Nay Delaware: Biden (D-DE), Nay Carper (D-DE), Nay Florida: Martinez (R-FL), Yea Nelson (D-FL), Nay Georgia: Chambliss (R-GA), Yea Isakson (R-GA), Yea Hawaii: Akaka (D-HI), Nay Inouye (D-HI), Not Voting Idaho: Craig (R-ID), Yea Crapo (R-ID), Yea Illinois: Durbin (D-IL), Nay Obama (D-IL), Nay Indiana: Bayh (D-IN), Nay Lugar...

Democratic leaders claimed victory yesterday over the deal senators cut regarding filibusters of judicial nominees, while most Republicans said it violated their principles and conservative activists vowed retribution. "Our republic stands strong. Our Constitution is solid. Our flag flies over a nation that has reaffirmed its faith in freedom," said Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, Nevada Democrat, while Sens. Edward M. Kennedy, Massachusetts Democrat, and Charles E. Schumer, New York Democrat, and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi praised the deal for averting a crisis. But while most Democrats crowed, the Congressional Black Caucus sounded a discordant note. "This deal is...

Senate Deal Detonated Against The Constitution By Moderates By Kevin Fobbs May 25, 2005 The Senate deal worked out by 14 moderate Republican and Democratic senators may look official and sport an official sounding name -- "Memorandum of Understanding on Judicial Nominations" -- but America and the U.S. Constitution were hoodwinked. Yep, they pulled a quick one all right. We actually were able to see the Constitution being literally hijacked, yes, heisted right from under our very noses. Some in the Senate felt that the institution was dangling dangerously on the precipice, like Senator Robert Byrd -- absolutely the last...

Does Senator McCain deserve our support? HELL NO!

WASHINGTON — Moderate senators from both parties are working behind the scenes on a compromise as a battle plays out on the Senate floor on whether President Bush's judicial nominees should all be given a straight confirmation vote in the chamber. Although lawmakers involved in the talks say progress is being made, they're unsure a deal will necessarily be made on Wednesday. ....

Regarding "Filibuster's traditional use is ignored" (Letters, Wednesday): The writer said the filibuster has never been used before to block a judicial nominee. The truth is that during the Clinton administration, 60 judicial nominees were blocked by Republicans, using means including the filibuster. In fact, Bill Frist even joined in the filibuster of 9th Circuit nominee Richard Paez. Also, Democrats have approved more than 200 of President Bush's judicial nominees while only 10 have been blocked. For Republicans to make such a big deal over those 10 nominations while they blocked 60 of Clinton's nominees is extremely misleading and hypocritical....

Apparently, a vote on the constitutional, or "nuclear," option could take place as early as this week. More simply put, a vote to end the filibuster could take place this week. As feministmajority.org explains the filibuster, "Right now, it takes only 41 votes to continue debate and block a vote on a judicial nominee. It takes 60 votes to end debate and force a full Senate vote." This use of the filibuster is obviously subversive. Those who use it, know it is subversive, and love it for that very fact. Those who oppose it, oppose it as a subversive tactic....

Hope you enjoy my latest stellardendrite original. If you use it for any purpose please give credit to the creator (me). :)

Now that some conservatives are in a tizzy about federal judges, here is something for them to ponder: The liberals on the U.S. Supreme Court just took a stand in favor of gun-ownership rights, while the conservatives on the court took a stand against them. Go figure. At issue is the law Congress wrote that says a person convicted of a felony "in any court" may not own a firearm. A fellow from Pennsylvania was charged with perjury and with illegal ownership of two handguns because he had answered "no" to the felony-conviction question. Turns out he had served time...

The Republican leaders in the Senate do not have to make the false choice between endless toleration of Democratic filibusters that enfeeble their majority and the so-called “nuclear option” — a ruling that filibusters of judicial nominations are unconstitutional — which will set off partisan wrangling for the balance of the Bush tenure. It is absurd to try to tell the American people why filibusters of judicial nominations violate the Constitution while those of presidential nonjudicial appointments and of regular legislation do not. The American people are going to see the denial of the right of unlimited debate as the...

Has anyone seen this commercial the dems have put out? BWAAAAAAAAAA

Just heard on Hugh Hewitt radio show that the maverick senator from arizona is planning to vote with the democrates on the fillibuster.

I would like to ask the many talented and resourceful members of Freeperville to do a little investigating, if we can. There is an ad running on the cable news channels featuring a man who says he's "a common sense Republicam who knows democracy works best when both sides are heard." This guy then goes on to tell us about the proposal to exercise the constitutional option in the Senate, and change the rule to allow the ending of a filibuster on judicial nominees with a simple majority vote. This ad is obviously opposed to the exercise of constitutional power...

During President Bush's first term, 10 of his judicial nominees were filibustered by Senate Democrats. This month, when the 109th Congress convened, Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist finally declared war. Calling the filibusters an "unfortunate break with more than 200 years of Senate tradition," he made the Democrats an offer he hopes they can't refuse. "Right now," he said ominously, "we cannot be certain judicial filibusters will cease. So I reserve the right to propose changes to Senate Rule XXII and do not acquiesce to carrying over all the rules from the last Congress." In other words, if Democrats don't...

Title and link only.

 About Us Our Members Newsletters Calendar Hall of Fame Radio  Jobs/Internships  Contact Congress Historical Docs -- Advertisements* -- Townhall.com 214 Massachusetts Ave NE Washington, DC 20002 202-608-6099 Fax 202-544-7330Email us Our Privacy PolicyAdvertise With Us *Advertisers may or may not share political views with Townhall.com.      More on Politics and Elections 2004 Legislative Report Card Released for ArizonaPoliticians Serve At The Pleasure Of CitizenryThe Defense Secretary We Have: Our soldiers deserve better [More] Today's Opinion Top Ten as rated by you MondayDiana West Keeping Christ in ChristmasJeff Jacoby A Jew says 'Merry Christmas'Robert Novak Byrd's nuclear optionMichael Barone Searching for Mr. WilsonDebra Saunders Time is...

Who sits on the Supreme Court for life may be more important than who sits in the White House for four years. With vacancies to fill among federal judges in general and vacancies expected to occur on the aging Supreme Court in particular, the stakes are very high in the judicial appointments made in the next few years. We and our children will be living with the consequences for a long time. This looks like an opportunity that may come just once in a lifetime to make judicial appointments that will stop the courts' dangerous pattern of continually eroding away the...