Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Benherszen
Between 1968 and 2001, both parties used filibusters to oppose judicial nominees.

A lot of this guy's logic comes from this statement, which is seriously misleading. The fact is that it's the Dems who have already dropped the 'Nuclear Option', insisting on a super-majority for judicial confirmation. The Repubs are just reacting, no matter how it sounds in the MSM echo chamber.

6 posted on 05/10/2005 7:04:46 PM PDT by Starve The Beast (I used to be disgusted, but now I try to be amused)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Starve The Beast

He didn't address how in the past, a filibuster required staying up, speaking. This crap has gone on for far too long. They would have worn themselves out.

This is just a temper tantrum. Holding out on a quarrum (like when the Chicken D's left Texas to avoid voting on the 200x redistricting).


34 posted on 05/10/2005 11:50:27 PM PDT by weegee (WE FOUGHT ZOGBYISM November 2, 2004 - 60 Million Voters versus 60 Minutes - BUSH WINS!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson