Democrats in Denial (Includes stuff re judges)

American Spectator ^ | 11/9/04 | Brandon Crocker

[Another Thought]

Well, a whole lot of us think that the Democrats didn't lose fair and square either. I suspect if there was a thorough, nonpartisan (impossible) investigation, we might find that B/C04 actually won some additional states.

[Luke21]

I'd like to see someone take a survey of Republicans about whether we think the Democrats cheat.

[KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle]

100% Democrat-voting neighborhood:

[Drango]

slightly more than half of all Democrats think that Bush did not win the election fair and square

Sad. However, that's only about 25% of the voters. And the'll believe anything they're told.

[Dog Gone]

In Bush's second term, if the now even smaller minority of Democratic senators insists on filibustering qualified conservative nominees against whom they cannot muster enough votes to defeat, we should expect Bush and the Republican leadership in the Senate to take the next step -- institute a Senate rule to authorize a full Senate vote on judicial nominees upon the assent of a simple majority.

They should institute this rule regardless of whether the Rats threaten to filibuster.

[Cicero]

Yes, the media were afraid to talk about it too explicitly, but judicial appointments are job number one, job number two, and job number three. There's nothing more important, because unless we start taking back the courts we will have more 9th circuit courts, more SCOFLAws, more SCONJs, more judges in Ohio declaring that people can vote wherever they like and no one can ask them for ID.

Our government depends on a fair and honest judiciary, and we are very close to the tipping point where we will never have another chance to achieve one.

That, of course, is why Specter needs to be dealt with. And he is a LOT easier to deal with now, while Bush is strong, than later, when Bush is a lame duck and his back is against the wall again with a pimping press in full cry against him.

Do it soon and do it now, as Machiavelli would advise.

[mrsmith]

There is a hard-boiled political reson to end the filibuster that isn't mentioned here.
Dems can use it to attack our 'moderate' Republicans.

Our 'moderates' have to vote against pro-life judges to please their electorate. That's why they have such high NARAL ratings (Snowe 83 ,Collins 83, and Chafee 90). Before, they could count on the Dem's filibuster succeeding without their votes and didn't have to defy the party.
Now, not voting to suport a filibuster of a pro-life nominee will be the same as voting for the nominee, since he will be approved by the majority.

Our 'moderates' have to either support the filibuster or be beaten in the next election by a Dem who will.

Change the filibuster rule and they will no longer be in a losing position.
They can vote against the pro-life nominee and please their voters- and it won't make any difference because the nominee will still be approved by the majority vote!

[jmaroneps37]

frenchie certainly is in denial. He's talking about running in 08. He just can't bring himself to read the numbers. 35% of his voters were voting against W. The rat line could have had a cheese sandwich on it and gotten at least 35%.
frenchie is really just shooting a shot over the beast's head. Now he realizes he was had by the team clinocchio.

[pookie18]

I believe I saw 70% on FoxNews last night.

[Mr. Jeeves]

And it should be the first order of business in January, before any contentious nominations come up.

[penowa]

If Republicans don't get rid of the cloture rule for judicial nominees, then as far as I am concerned they have no desire to have conservative judges on the courts. The Republicans would NEVER pull this stuff on a Democrat president so it can't be that they want to preserve their option to stop activist leftwing nutjobs from getting on the courts. They've already proven that with the 97-3 vote for Ginsburg.

[Plutarch]

Hatred for George Bush...was what was supposed to propel Democrats into power this year.

The Left would have "hated" any Republican President this election, Iraq war or no, pleasing personality and manner or no, tax cut or no.

Any Republican President likely to appoint 3-4 USSC Justices in his second term will feel the wrath of the Left's unbridled fury.

Since the Left has no popular issues or credible candidates with which to run, character assassination is all that is left to them. Thus the "hate."

[Redbob]

"BUSH HAS LEARNED THAT Washington is not Texas, where he could work with moderate Democrats to achieve bipartisan goals."

Perhaps because what is known as a "moderate" in these parts would be seen as a "rabid right-wing whacko" by the likes of Arlen Specter...

[EdReform]

BTTT

[Grampa Dave]

Hey, Meek, would you please update this tombstone to show checkmark's after each named MSM? Thanks

"Requiescat in fracta''

[prognostigaator]

The Democratic definition of "mainstream" =thinking that Supreme Court decisions should take into account world opinion or precedents set by courts in Canada, Belgium, or Mozambique.

This is one more "global test" that is unacceptable to George W. Bush, as it should be to all Americans. And it is one more reason that this election was enormously important.

[MeekOneGOP]

Will do, Grampa. :^)

[MeekOneGOP]

bump!

[Grampa Dave]

Please freep mail with the codes.