Posted on 03/31/2005 6:12:48 AM PST by Loud Mime
Senator Byrd has finally screwed up with his constitutional sophism. Now he has given the republicans the road map that will allow President Bush's judicial appointments to be approved by fifty-one members of the Senate.
Yesterday (Wednesday, March 29, 2005) a WSJ editorial brought forward a great idea. It is based on Byrd's last statement that there is nothing in the Constitution that requires the Senate to give the judicial appointees of President Bush and up or down vote...and he's right.
The Constitution orders the advice and consent of the Senate; that's all, no vote. Let's run with this idea: All it will now take is fifty-one Senators to write a letter to the President giving their consent.
Done. Deal over. President Bush's nominees become judges.
Thank you, Senator Byrd.
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
Oh my God. What a brilliant friggin' idea. Shove it, Sheets. :)
I wonder who came up with this....Paul Gigot? Did somebody from the Senate give this information to them for publicizing it? The White House? Karl Rove?
Whatever, whoever....this is a great idea.
((((ping))))
The perfect Rovian Storm strikes again. BWA HA HA hA!
It might be true but will these gutless wonders carry it through. I will believe that when I see it.
We won't think it's so Hill-arious when President Hillary gets the 45D Senators and the 6 RINO Senators to do the same...
Chief Justice George Greer, anyone???
Reagan80
That's redundant. Anything Rovian is normally perfect. LOL! Just ask the people at DU.
Excellent point!
If she gets the consent, she gets the consent. Just work to make sure that she isn't the President if thats what your scared of.
The link goes to the front page of WSJ....where is the link to the article. Thanks.
The link to the article is on a subscriber page. I subscribe to the print edition (and have for years). I waited for a day to pass before I printed this and chose to give the WSJ credit instead of a vanity post.
I never quoted the article, I just gave its general idea.
I hope that is proper.
leaving ping dropping on Byrd
Oh ok....not sure if it's "proper" either, but thanks for posting the info.
If the Republican Senators have that loser attitude the idea is dead.
Why not run with it now. Let President Bush get at least THREE Supreme Court nominees in and then be scared and worried about President "Democrat" using the same tactic. Democrats will be so furious by the second Supreme they will probably initiate a new law against it anyway so use it until you can't.
If a president appoints a person to fill a judgeship vacancy, then that person automatically becomes the judge. The Senate would have to vote AGAINST the nomination in order to kill it. By not voting, they automatically give their CONSENT.........
The solution is simply to defeat any backstabbing RINOs in the primary. The RATs will never get 51 Senators to "consent" to ultra liberal nominees unless they get crossover GOP votes.
I do realize that's a difficult task when you even have some freepers trying to shove Snarlin' MacSpecter down our throats in the PRIMARY because "only" he can "win", but we can make up for those mistakes starting in 2006.
Say buh bye to Senators Chafee and Jeffords.
I think the last four years were on thin ice, especially with the editorial powers of the old media. Byrd didn't say this no-vote thing back then. But now he has.
Now we can get things done.
Somewhere, somebody had this "consent" tactic in mind. Given todays political structure, it's time to use it.
so, you mean assumed consent?
Interesting view. After all, the President was elected by the people, so he's their representative.
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.