Posted on 03/15/2005 8:36:06 PM PST by Zivasmate
Remarks by Senator Harry Reid - March 15, 2005
Preserving Checks and Balances
On a late September day in 1787, the Constitutional Convention finished its work. As Benjamin Franklin walked down the steps of Independence Hall, a Philadelphia woman named Elizabeth Powell stopped him and asked, "Well, Doctor, what have we got: a republic or a monarchy?"
He responded, "A republic. If you can keep it."
For more than two centuries, we have kept our republic because Americans have understood that our liberty is protected by our laws and by a government of limited powers.
Our Constitution provides for checks and balances so that no one person in power, so that no one political party can hold total control over the course of our nation.
But now, in order to break down the separation of powers and ram through their appointees to the judicial branch, President Bush and the Republican leadership want to eliminate a two-hundred-year-old American rule saying that every member of the Senate can rise to say their piece and speak on behalf of the people that sent them here.
The fact is that this President has a better record of having his judicial nominees approved than any President in the past twenty-five years. Only ten of 214 nominations have been turned down.
So it is clear that this attempt to strip away these important checks and balances is not about judges. It is about the desire for absolute power.
But our nation's basic rules are there for the moments when the eyes of the powerful grow large and hungry; when their willfulness makes them determined to do whatever it takes to win, and prevail at whatever the cost.
Presidents and parties have grown drunk with power before. Two Presidents of my own party --Thomas Jefferson and Franklin Roosevelt-- began their second terms of office with majorities in Congress and then tried to change the rules governing judges so that they could stack the court with those who would do their bidding. They were wrong to try to change our basic American rules -- and Americans, and Senators of both parties, stood up to tell them so.
Today, another attempt is being considered to rewrite the rules so that those in power can get their way.
It would mean that the US Senate becomes merely a rubber stamp for the Executive Branch.
It would mean that one political party --be it Republicans today or Democrats tomorrow-- gets to have all the say.
Oh? And what was the vote count on those 10 who were turned down?
They need some more work on their talking points.
Bring back McCauliffe. Dean can't cut it.
It is strange that he talks about everyone in the Senate getting their say---
The fact that the dems WON'T let the nominees have an up-or-down vote is what is keeping ALL of the Senators from having a say instead of just the judiciary committee...
Not to mention the lack thereof.
This tripe is beyond contempt. The 10 filibustered are nomineses to the US Courts of Appeal, the second most powerful court in the US and the place where most judicial law is crafted. By getting judges appointed who actually care about the constitution and the rule of law we can hopefully start to take our country back, if its not already too late.
The idea that Dingy Harry could give a flying eff about limited government makes me nauseous. When was the last time you met a Demonicrat who wanted limited gov't other than a few southerners. This is just a pack of bald faced lies. Harry is basically a wimp. He has a week high pitched voice which means that Hillary already tooks his balls off. The outcome of this showdown is going to quite hysterical.
Richard Nixon only burglarized the Watergate Hotel ONCE.
By Harry Reid's count, he should get at least 9 more cracks.
When it's done to (non-conservative) minorities, they call it a "glass ceiling".
"The idea that Dingy Harry could give a flying eff about limited government makes me nauseous. When was the last time you met a Demonicrat who wanted limited gov't other than a few southerners. This is just a pack of bald faced lies."
The Demorats have always wanted a limited government - limited to themselves and their cornball ideas. Thank G-d for the wise perception of the American people, most of who see them for what they are - haters of everything upon which America was founded, with the exception of some selective civil liberties.
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.