Bush vows bitter end fight for justices [GOP considers "nuke option}

Human Events Online ^ | John Gizzi

[sdk7x7]

hmmm, interesting analysis

[Goreknowshowtocheat]

Go Nuclear!!!!!

[Lurker]

Dear President Bush.

Two words, sir:

Recess Appointments.

Regards,

L

[NicknamedBob]

"Remember—I used to cut people's hearts out for a living."

Hmmm. Good line! But in dealing with people like Kennedy, Clinton, and Schumer(sp?), is Frist qualified for microsurgery?

[BibChr]

"I will stand with them to the bitter end," said the President

I love W.

I don't love that statement.

"Stand with" is passive. "Bitter end" accepts Demo victory.

What he should have said is....

"I will take whatever actions necessary to see to it that the Senate minority stops shirking its Constitutional duty and obstructing the rule of law, and votes on my appointments."

Dan

[chainsaw]

Recess Appointments.

Absoluely. The senate would have to vote on them in one year, but that would take a majority vote and the dems don't have that. That would be one way to get an up or down vote.

[You Gotta Be Kidding Me]

Simple solution:

President Bush notifys the US Senate that (so-and-so) will be seated as judge XYZ, UNLESS the US Senate votes to disapprove the nominee and that failure to vote, either way, will be considered to be the Senate's 'consent' to the nominee.

[hellinahandcart]

a GOP that controls only 51 Senate seats

Um...isn't this wrong?

Thought we had 52.

[Republican Wildcat]

The Democrats couldn't just block the vote the same way they are now?

[Keith]

WE have 52...plus Zell Miller....

[Plutarch]

"The reason Republicans don't have all 51 of their senators...is that a number of them...are worried that changing the rules would make it easier someday for a President Hillary Clinton to get her judicial nominees through the Senate."

What pathetic Minority Loser think. The Republicans are the Majority Party and it is hardly in the Republican interest to let the diminishing numbers of Democrats act like a Majority. Queen Victoria had it right:

"We are not interested in the possibilities of defeat; they do not exist."

ATTRIBUTION: Victoria (1819–1901), British monarch, Queen of Great Britain and Ireland. Letter, December 1899, to statesman A.J. Balfour, during the “Black Week” of the Boer War.

[Aeronaut]

President Bush notifys the US Senate that (so-and-so) will be seated as judge XYZ, UNLESS the US Senate votes to disapprove the nominee and that failure to vote, either way, will be considered to be the Senate's 'consent' to the nominee.

I like that. Any chance of A). them doing it, and B). its legality?

[Guillermo]

Estrada refused a recess appointment.

That is not the answer.

They should stay in session 24/7 until a proper vote can occur.

Keep them there through New Years eve if they have to.

[PokeyJoe]

Yeah, make some recess appointments.

Pick a few notables for recess appointments.

Robert Bork.
Newt Gingrich.
JC Watts.
Ward Connely.
Miguel Estrada.
Linda Chavez.
Linda Tripp.
Neal Bush. (if JFK can nominate his brother as AG, then George can nominate his brother for a judgeship).
etc . . .

[hellinahandcart]

I knew we were celebrating more than a two-seat pickup last November. :D

[tysont]

The senate would have to vote on them in one year

Can you document the requirement for the senate to vote on them?

[Republican Wildcat]

No, it's 51.

[Just mythoughts]

Tell the DIMs in the Senate that when they confirm these judges they can come the next day to the White House and see that "INTEL" they are so worried about. They can even bring "JOE WILSON"!

[Republican Wildcat]

I knew we were celebrating more than a two-seat pickup last November. :D

That's exactly what we were celebrating. There are 51 in the Republican caucus and 49 in the Democrat caucus (although Zell Miller is AWOL on the Dem side).

[pjd]

The fear, regarding the nuclear option, is totally unfounded. Republicans are afraid that a rule change now would make it difficult to block the Democrats at some future date when Rats are a majority. Does anyone in his right mind believe that the Democrats wouldn't make that rule change themselves if minority Republicans were blocking appointments?

The Republicans have a choice. Do it now and take some advantage, or wait until the Democrats do it when they are in power and they completely stack the courts. The Dems would even have the audacity to change the rules, and then change them back after they get their way.