Yo...Rats. Say hello to my little friend!
Posted on 03/15/2005 12:22:27 PM PST by Sub-Driver
Democrats Threaten to Stop Senate Business if GOP Changes Rules on Judge Confirmations By David Espo The Associated Press
WASHINGTON (AP) - Democrats served notice Tuesday that they will slow or stop most Senate business if Republicans unilaterally change the rules to assure confirmation of President Bush's controversial court appointments.
Any such change would mark "an unprecedented abuse of power," Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., wrote Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn.
Reid, the Democratic leader, exempted military and national security legislation from the threat, and said Democrats would not block passage of measures needed to assure continuation of critical government services.
"To shut down the Senate would be irresponsible and partisan," Frist said in swift rebuttal. "The solution is simple: return to 200 years of tradition and allow up or down votes on judges."
The exchange marked the latest development in a long-simmering struggle over Bush's court appointments. Democrats blocked votes on 10 nominees during the last Congress, attacking them as too conservative to warrant lifetime appointments.
Accusing Democrats of obstruction, Republicans sought to make an issue of it in the elections last fall, in which they gained four seats.
Bush has already renominated some of the judges, and Reid has said previously the Democrats' position has not changed.
(Excerpt) Read more at ap.tbo.com ...
You have four parties in the Senate:
Democrats
Republicans
"Independents" (Jeffords)
RINOs (and accomodationists)
You don't think that the dims can strip off 5 of those 7 to defeat the nuclear option? I'll almost guarantee you the first four will vote against the Republicans if it comes down to a confrontation. Specter will quote "Scottish Law" again. Don't you think one of the other 3, or someone I haven't named, will also jump ship in order to exercise some degree of power?
Remember in the play 1776, the final vote was put to a man who would be remembered as "the one who defeated independence" if he voted against, or only remembered, if at all, as one of the many who who voted for it. In that version he didn't want to stand out, so voting for independence was his "safe choice." None of these prima donnas merely want to be "one of the pack." If they have an opportunity to stand out, to be seen as casting the deciding vote, they'll jump at it, even if it means betraying every position they've ever taken. That goes for others, like Lott or a dozen other Republicans.
There are a few, but not a lot of, admirable people in the Senate, on either side.
Well, a real filibuster would be interesting from Mr Reid. I've never quite seen anyone display a temper tantrum for 24 hours straight.
Pray tell, what would be the harm in shutting down the senate? Talk about self-important snobbery! We can do just fine without these phony-baloney bastards infringing our rights and taxing us to the poorhouse. Go for it, boys.
They always call it "unilateral" when they don't like what's going on? It's like they learned a new word and look for any opportunity to use it.
Yo...Rats. Say hello to my little friend!
Sounds like the ultimate win win to me
Too bad they couldnt stop business before that awful bankruptcy "reform" bill was passed.
Yes, I think so.
There was an old hack that LBJ wanted to be Chief Justice of the Supreme Court - Abe Fortas.
Mr. Fortas was a crook - why else would he be a friend of LBJ's? - and the GOP fillibustered him. When it became known that Fortas had lied to the Senate Judiciary committee, and that he'd accepted bribes from a known convict, a vote to end the fillibuster failed, and Fortas finally withdrew his nomination.
Subsequently, he resigned from the SCOTUS, by which time he was so notorious he was unable to even rejoin the law firm he had founded!
A few tips in credibility:
1) Use correct facts (Oklahoma, not New Mexico)
2) Use the Caps Lock key sparingly
3) Try to avoid subjective statements ( "THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY IS A CRIMINAL ENTERPRISE" )
LOL
Do tell.
The salient point is that there's nothing in the Constitution to prevent a rules change.
Rather circular logic here: --- Democrats threaten to stop Senate business...unless they're allowed to stop Senate business.
Your information is incorrect. The cloture rule applies to all debate and is not exclusive to nominees as you appear to imply. Additionally, ONLY dems have violated 200 years of tradition and the spirit of the rules by evoking a filibuster to prevent an up or down vote on judges. If you disagree -produce one example.
Does this mean we're getting closer to the Revolution now? I'm tired of waiting and tolerating these socialist who are destroying the country.
Any such change would mark "an unprecedented abuse of power," Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., wrote Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn.
you mean like ruling the ban on same sex marriage unconstitutional, even though the people voted for the ban? abuse like that?
Hillary is gettng no where near the White House. Unless the Republicans are dumb enough to run Condi.
Time to call their bluff.
Shouldn't that be
Rat fight! Rat fight!
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.