What is happening is not a filibuster. It's the republican leadership caving in to the dems.
Wouldn't we like to see Kennedy or Reid up there for days babbling on and on?
Oh... wait. I meant talking on and on. They already babble.
Posted on 04/22/2005 3:38:25 PM PDT by CHARLITE
I want you to know that this effort in Washington to bring an end to the unconstitutional use of the fiibuster to prevent judicial nominees from getting an up-or-down vote on the Senate floor is a marathon - not a sprint. I have been meeting with members of the Senate and their staff this week. I met late yesterday with Senators Coburn and Brownback as they were coming off the floor of the Senate. I conveyed to them that there is growing support for a rules change and that more than 30,000 ACLJ members and supporters have now signed on to our Petition to End Judicial Filibusters. I also had the opportunity this week to talk and meet with reporters concerning this critical issue - the Wall Street Journal, Los Angeles Times, the New Yorker Magazine - and many others. The media interest on this very important topic continues to intensify.
I am convinced this effort is very important and critical to ensuring that conservative, pro-life nominees get fair treatment in the confirmation process. It now appears that it could be mid-May before this issue comes to a head in the Senate. With the Judiciary Committee approval of Janice Rogers Brown and Priscilla Owen, the stage is set for the showdown. But it now appears the Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist will wait until after the upcoming recess to bring these nominees to the floor of the Senate.
I want to encourage you to watch a special television program tonight - a 2-hour special - that will air on TBN at 10:00pm ET. We have a great show that includes interviews with our senior attorneys who are in court on these very issues - like the Ten Commandments - issues where the judiciary plays such an important role. And, I will have a special interview with John Ashcroft, former U.S. Attorney General and Distinguished Professor of Law at Regent University. We have information posted online at our website concerning the broadcast and how you can view it.http://www.aclj.org/
Also, tonight, on C-SPAN, an important program involving a debate with Nadine Strossen of the ACLU. I think you will find it informative and interesting. That airs tonight at 7:00pm ET on C-SPAN.
thanks
Thank you. Watching C-Span now.
Remember when the Republican-led congress voted to limit the term of the presidency? And remember when everyone wished they could have Ronald Reagan for a third term? Doesn't the Senate understand that ending the fillibuster could come back to haunt them one day? For godsake, can't we learn from history so we aren't condemned to repeat it?
Get serious. The demoncrats would change the rule themselves if they needed to. They understand power. Pubbies know only cowardice.
What is happening is not a filibuster. It's the republican leadership caving in to the dems.
Wouldn't we like to see Kennedy or Reid up there for days babbling on and on?
Oh... wait. I meant talking on and on. They already babble.
Hey Newbie...study this subject a little more.
Senator Frist needs to make the Democrats hold the floor continuously until the American populace realizes that the government is not the solution, it is the problem. If the Dems had to actually filibuster, they would cave. Without his daily infusion of pork, Sheets would lose his cachet with the people of WV. Possibly then the folks back home would begin to wonder just what good those bloviating Dims were to begin with.
Mr. Bush would have to be prepared to blame Frist, and Frist would have to be ready to blame the Democrats, but a filibuster in fact as well as in name would not be a bad thing for the Republican party. It might sound the death knoll for the Jackass party, though.
The main problem that I have is that WE WON.......but our leaders are behaving like losers! That's the major problem. It's as though they don't have a clue how to wield power effectively! The Dems LOST........and from the mood of the electorate, I had the impression that we were prepared to vote even more Republicans into office, hence more Dems OUT in '06, but if our main "movers and shakers" keep on getting themselves moved and shaken, we aren't going to continue to make the gains that we'd hoped for in the mid terms.
How?
How does the Senate move from debate to agree to vote on the nominee? That is the question. The word "filibuster" conjures up a false image, and I advocate dropping that word when the dialogue relates to obstruction of discharging Senate duty by refusal to vote.
The way the voting process starts is a Senator calls for the vote. If one Senator objects, there is no vote. All the Senator has to say is, "I object." No big speech, no late nights. Just, "I object."
A simple and solitary objection shifts the burden to the Senator who called for the vote. He (or she) has to get 60 Senators to agree to vote. And here is where the minority in lockstep can hold up the vote. When 41 Senators say, in unison, "I object," or even more simply, "no," there is no vote.
No long speech, no late nights. Just plain, "no." The Senate avoids its DUTY to dispose of the nominee (one way or the other) by refusing to vote.
Now, sit back and watch the vast majority of media persist, "Make them stay up all night! Make them talk! What ever happend to a 'real' filibuster?! Will someone MAKE these people debate? Make them have a real filibuster. The Senate should run 24 x 7 until the dems give up. Senator Frist needs to make the Democrats hold the floor continuously."
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.