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

To: dts32041

Can someone come up with a rational explanation why GW would cave like this?


2 posted on 05/20/2004 10:17:41 PM PDT by oreolady (John Kerry threw my tagline over the fence!!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: oreolady
Rush came up with an explanation, don't know if it is rational.

Rush believes that GWB thinks the dignity of the presidency is so important , he has to make it appear above the fray.

Therefore he doesn't want to get in a peeing contest with congress, unless it is really really important, like vetoing the highway appropriations bill.

3 posted on 05/20/2004 10:21:11 PM PDT by dts32041 ("Liberty is not America's gift to the world, it is God's gift to humanity" George W Bush 28 Jan 2003)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: oreolady
It forces the Senate to continue working so that John F'n Kerry misses more important votes.

Problem is if he is absent the vote the flip flops are not so apparent

4 posted on 05/20/2004 10:21:46 PM PDT by spokeshave (It is, as it was)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: oreolady
Hmmmmmm? 27 judges to fill vacanies in overloaded courts?

If the damned Republicans in Congress would do their jobs this wouldn't be necessary.

5 posted on 05/20/2004 10:21:53 PM PDT by CWOJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: oreolady

I'm with you; Bush better have some kickass tricks up his sleeve if he's gonna make a purse outta this ear.


11 posted on 05/20/2004 10:32:39 PM PDT by thegreatbeast (Quid lucrum istic mihi est?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: oreolady

Only a tin foil explanation here. Both parties are involved in the NWO type stuff...it is all I can come up with.

Unbelievable.

As Rush said the other day: "I am beginning to wonder who wants it most, us or them. I really think it is them!"


12 posted on 05/20/2004 10:33:53 PM PDT by Indie (We don't need no steenkin' experts!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: oreolady
There's a simple explanation for this maneuver. The President can make recess appointments only when Congress is not in session. The Congress will remain in session more or less continuously for quite some time. Bush's political advisers seem to be telling him to keep a low profile and avoid confrontation. (I personally disagree on both points. Bush should ignore the election entirely and do his job, especially if that means invading Syria--and soon.)

Because the agreement is not binding, Bush can resume making recess appointments in the event that Congress should go home. Or he can make them after the election. Irrelevant, he has not given up anything of consequence. There probably are no "controversial" judicial nominees willing to accept a recess appointment right now and there very well may not be any until the election.

It's not exactly a surrender.
13 posted on 05/20/2004 10:35:01 PM PDT by dufekin (John F. Kerry. Irrational, improvident, backward, seditious.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: oreolady

President Bush has just agreed to a deal where 25 so-called "non-controversial" judges will get up/down votes while Bush has agreed to not recess appoint judges until his second term. This deal has outraged/confused/frustrated many Freepers but I think everyone is missing the big picture.

First what did Bush give up? He agreed not to recess. Until term #2. But recess appts only serve until the next Congress. So Bush is giving up what, 7 months of a judge term? Recall that Bush offered recess noms to more than Pickering from MS and Pryor from AL. Others refused. Estrada, a very popular cause on this site, refused a recess appt. So all in all, Bush really did not give up much, because in reality most judges don't want it.

What does Bush get? 25 right of center judges. Most are district court, but apparently five are for the Appeals court.

The point is, the fundamental equation has not changed. The real battle is over the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court sets precedent for the lower courts to follow. While these lower posts are important, it's even more important to get conservatives on the High Court.

So to get more conservatives confirmed it's simple: 1. Help the GOP get a bigger Senate Majority 2. Call talk radio about Democrat judicial obstruction 3. Write your newspaper about Democrat judicial obstruction 4. Tell the GOP/Senate/Bush to fight for conservative judges 5. Make sure you get all of your conservative family and friends to vote in November

This agreement between Bush and Dashcle is meaningless. If this wasn't done, zero judges would have been confirmed this year. Qualified judges like Priscilla Owen (TX Supreme Court), Janice Brown (CA Supreme Court), among many others will be a campaign issue. Bush used this issue in 2002 to stunning effect, pulling off big wins in Minnesota (Coleman), GA (Chambliss), and MI (Talent). It also helped in Texas (Cornyn). But this agreement does not change the fundamental fact that the Dems are going all out to stop conservative appointees, particularly conservative minorities from serving in high judicial positions. Right now, Bush is preoccupied with Iraq. But he is with us on the judges. He needs us to do the heavy lifting for now becuase he's trying to save the world from radical Islamic extremism. But come the campaign season, FR will see that Bush will fight for his judges, will Kerry will try to support and oppose Bush's judges.

Let's resolve to help make the judicial obstruction an even bigger issue than it already is by calling talk radio, writing letters, working on campaigns, calling Congress and the President etc.

Read my screenline, that's what we need to do!


17 posted on 05/20/2004 10:37:56 PM PDT by votelife (Elect a Filibuster Proof Majority)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: oreolady

He didn't!


27 posted on 05/20/2004 11:29:26 PM PDT by CyberAnt (The 2004 Election is for the SOUL of AMERICA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: oreolady

Bush is going to win the election.


42 posted on 05/21/2004 12:28:44 AM PDT by Major_Risktaker (Oderint dum metuant)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: oreolady

"Can someone come up with a rational explanation why GW would cave like this?"

Sure, I will tell you. After Bush wins in November he is going to pay back all the RATS that stabbed him in the back over the last four years.

By agreeing to this, he gets his judges approved. So now that is another issue off the table. Depending on the election results for both the presidency, senate and house, the WH can safely ascertain what they will need to do about the court system over the next four years.

If Daschle loses this all becomes irrelevant. Bush as always is playing poker. If Bush loses, it also becomes irrelevant because the Senate still has a Republicn majority, Bush's judges are in office and the RATS won't be able to fill any high court seats either.

At worst this is a stalemate.


66 posted on 05/21/2004 6:38:31 AM PDT by EQAndyBuzz (Only difference between the liberals and the Nazis is that the liberals love the Communists.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: oreolady

You all are going to drive me crazy.

President Bush has done a great job on his nominees. He said he would stop making recess appointments IF the Dems would stop blocking the votes. That is all. How in the world do you interpret that as caving in?

Has everyone gone nuts here? It seems like everyone on both sides spends his or her days looking to see if there is any minor blemish on the President to attack. He may not be perfect, but he is pretty darn good and a far cry from the alternative.

Why are you all so quick to sound like you are writing for the Guardian, or for the Kkerry cmpaign. Does that help your cause in any way, shape or form?


68 posted on 05/21/2004 6:47:46 AM PDT by Proud Legions
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: oreolady

Can someone come up with a rational explanation why GW would cave like this?

Yes.

He needs their support to authorize another $50 Billion (at least) to be spent over in Iraq. It is not a popular position and there are at least 4 gop senators who are not supporting the additional spending.

Rational? yes?


74 posted on 05/21/2004 10:40:36 AM PDT by WhiteGuy (Congress shall make no law... abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | 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