Posted on 03/01/2005 5:37:44 PM PST by OXENinFLA
For those who may not have seen it, Mr. Smith (Goes to Washington) is the fictional story of one young Senator's crusade against forces of corruption, and his lengthy filibuster, his lengthy filibuster for the values he hold dear. My how things have changed. These days, Mr. Smith would be called an obstructionist. Rumor has it that there is a plot on foot to curtail the right of extended debate in this hollowed chamber. Not in accordance with its rules, mind you, but by fiat from the Chair. Fiat from the Chair. The so-called nuclear option. Hear me! The so-called nuclear option.
This morning I asked a man, "What does the nuclear option mean to you?" He said, "Oh, you mean with Iran?" I was in the hospital a few days ago with my wife. And I asked her doctor, I asked a doctor, "What does the nuclear option mean to you?" He said, "Well, it sounds like we're getting ready to drop some device, some atomic device on North Korea." Well, the so-called nuclear option puports to be directed solely at the Senate's advice and consent prerogatives regarding federal judges. But the claim that no right exists to filibuster judges aims an arrow straight at the heart of the Senate's long tradition of unlimited debate.
James Madison, James Madison wanted to grant the Senate the power to select judicial appointees, with the executive relegated to the sidelines. But a compromise brought the present arrangement. The appointees selected by the executive, with the advice and consent of the Senate confirmed. Note, hear me again, note that nowhere, nowhere in the Constitution of the United States is a vote on appointments mandated.
It will be the Office of the President to nominate, and, with the advice and consent of the Senate, to appoint. There will, of course, be no exertion of choice on the part of the Senate. They may defeat one choice of the Executive, and oblige him to make another; but they cannot themselves choose - they can only rafity or reject the choice he may have made.
So you can see what it means to the smallest states in these United States to be able to stand on this floor and debate to their utmost. Until their feet will no longer hold them, and their lungs of brass will no longer speak in behalf of their states in behalf of a minority in behalf of an issue that affects vitally their constituencies. Unfettered debate.
One of the main bulwarks against the growing power, is free debate in the Senate. So long as there's free debate, men of courage and understanding will rise to defend against potential dictators. The Senate today is one place where no matter what else may exist, there is still a chance to be heard. An opportunity to speak. The duty to examine. And the obligation to protect. It is one of the few refuges of democracy.
Minorites have an illustrious past full of suffering, torture, smear and even death. Jesus Christ was killed by a majority. Columbus was smeared. Christians have been tortured. Had the United States Senate existed during those trying times, I'm sure those people would have found an advocate. Nowhere else can any political, social or religious group finding itself under sustained attack receive a better refuge. Well, Mr. President, Senator Jenner was right. The Senate was deliberatly conceived to be what he called a better refuge, meaning one styled as a guardian of the rights of the minority. The Senate is the watchdog because majorities can be wrong, and filibusters can highlight injustices, and history is full of examples.
Hitler's originality lay in his realization that effective revolutions in modern conditions are carried out with, and not without, not against, the power of the State. The correct order of events was first to secure access to that power of the State, and then begin his revolution. Hitler never abandoned the cloak of legality. He never abandoned the cloak of legality. He recognized the enormous, psychological value of having the law on his side. Instead, he turned the law inside out and made his illegality legal. And that is what the nuclear option seeks to do. To Rule 22 of the standing rules of the Senate. I said to someone this morning who was shoveling snow in my area. "What does nuclear option mean to you?" He answered, "Oh, you mean with Iran?" The people generally don't know what this is about. The nuclear option seeks to alter the rules by sidestepping the rules, thus making the impermissable the rule.
YEP! Maybe they'll show Hatch's response.
Thanks for the heads up
Here is a link
http://www.c-span.org/watch/cspan2_rm.asp?Cat=TV&Code=CS2
Well now we know who Grand Dragon Byrd sees as his role model, not that there was ever a lot of doubt.
It drives me up the wall when he waves his arm in the air like a magician.
Oh Lord, how long will we be subjected to the ramblings and rantings of this senile old SOB? Good people die young, but this is ridiculous.
Brass lungs?
Hatch's reply is what I want to see---I am so tired of seeing the dems whining and crying about things---
I want to see a Republican get up and tell them the way it is gonna be--
I know that is not what Hatch did, but dang, I would organize a parade if just ONE time Frist would stand up and tell the dems that they are being obstuctionists and the MAJORITY is not going to put up with it anymore!
I sincerely believe if the ole bat was 500 years younger, he could muster up the strength to do the Dean Scream.
I want to see Hatch's response too. The media has completely ignored it.
I love it when he flippes the pages he's reading and you can see the 2" Block print..
HATCH UP!!
Let me rearrange this so the sentence is a little clearer.
The Nation is the watchdog because minoritys can be wrong, and filibusters can obstruct justices, and recent history is full of examples.
That being said, I think former Klansman Democratic Senator Robert Byrd has inhaled too much smoke from too many burning crosses.
This was just to big to wait till tomorrow to post this from Thomas.
It will be interesting to see if these comments make it into the Congressional record; as I understand it, he can "revise and extend” his comments and that is all that will show up in the record.
This is a good approach by Hatch. He is laying out the actual rules of the Senate, something Byrd is awfully familiar with, as he often speaks on the subject as well as waving his little vest pocket sized booklet of the Constitution in everyone's face.
I do too, but the admins moved this into the Blogger section, so I'm just going to wait till I get the complete text from Thomas. I doubt Byrd will change it.
Those are very nice to have. Only $5.
Not sure .. I was trying to get the kids in bed and missed that part
Hatch's response was good .. but I wish he directly addressed Bryd's Hitlers Nazi comments
Really. If anyone can document that it would be great (I would like to think Frist and gang would be aware of it, but their timidity in the face of the increasingly hateful and insane rhetoric doesn't comfort me).
They don't even care about their hypocrisy, do they?
No, they do not.
Yeah, me too. Hugh mentioned that Ken Melman issued a statment on Byrds comments but I can't find them yet..
Yep! The voters are the watchdogs because the Senators can be wrong.
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.