Lindsey Graham interviewed on Mike Gallagher

Mike Gallagher Show - partial transcript ^ | 05/24/2005 | self

[AFPhys]

In the last hour of the show, Lindsey Graham was on the Mike Gallagher show. Here is a synopsis of what he said

- I pretty much leave out the other side of the conversation since it is usually pretty clear what Mike said:

- It's tough to disagree with your friends...
- I'd like to give you my reasoning here...
[interrupted by Mike with clip played of Reid crowing: sent a message to Pres & Radical R's]
- He's just playing that to his base. The bottom line is that Reid and the D's lose the battle over these three that they most wanted to block. Pryor, Brown, Owens will be confirmed real soon.
- If filibusters are allowed, that will damage the judiciary. We had to end that. This is a chance to start over and reinstate the Senate tradition of parties working together. But ...
- I am a YES vote - a solid YES - for the Constitutional Option - if the D's resume filibustering.
- I predict all eight of these nominees will get back in the process, and that seven of those eight will be confirmed - but that one will not.
- This is all about the Supreme Court, though.
- The real big problem I had is "what happens if the Constitutional option failed?" There are FIVE SOLID NOs against the Constitutional option. There are 4 or 5 unknown. This was too close. Failure would be a disaster and really cause problems.
- Best is to get these conservative justices on the bench, and that will reframe the debate for the D's since these are not now "too extreme".
- [What if D's Filibuster USSC justices?] - D's said they would not filibuster unless "exceptional circumstances" - and that's not a wide open phrase - they aren't sinning this.
- Conservative justices will now make it through the judicial process.
- I will vote for the Constitutional option if they filibuster Supreme Court and so will at least one more of the 12.
- [lost momentum?] - Maybe - but don't forget that they have now put "Neanderthals" (Kennedy/ Reid's words) to be judges, and so these are not "too conservative" to be on the bench.
- This has been the hardest thing I've done ...
- If they filibuster, I'll fight back hard - I'll start over with the "nuclear option" - but we'll be in a far stronger position when we're discussing the Supreme Court justices with the public.
- I may be wrong and hope I'm not about all this - time will tell.

...

[steveegg]

So which word will he break; the MOU or this statement?

[cicero's_son]

Good, good, good.

He is saying all of the right things. The more I hear about this deal, the more I like it.

DeWine and Graham are now the two ultimate power brokers in the Senate. They have both said definitively that they will support the Constitutional Option if the Dems start to filibuster again. They have also both indicated that they will support the President's nominees to the USSC.

[cicero's_son]

this is a win, folks. The status quo has been altered in significant favor of the Republicans.

Bingo.

And it is also a clear signal to the base--us--that we have the votes needed to get our Supreme Court nominees voted on and appointed.

[ken5050]

aha..thanks....

[AFPhys]

Thank you all for your appreciation of my writing this.

I'm just reporting what he said. I have expressed my - shall I say - "dismay" - about this on many other posts.

It seems to me Graham really feared that the C.O. was too shaky - and I hope he solidly in communication with Frist (hard to say) regarding that - but I think he's really right about a failure there really being a disaster.

Please copy a real transcript, or portions of one, if you run across them. I was pretty rough in my stenographic work on this while in the car. I may have retranslated my "abbreviations" incorrectly and misstated what he said.

[econ_grad]

The real big problem I had is "what happens if the Constitutional option failed?" There are FIVE SOLID NOs against the Constitutional option.

I mentioned this on a thread a few days ago. This is the only solid reasoning I could think of. If the nuclear option failed to carry, then Frist couldn't get any of them confirmed because it would totally embolden the Dems. This is the only logical scenario that makes sense. Still, Bush should have worked the phones like he did to get his pet welfare projects through Congress.

[traderrob6]

I absolutely agree, the doomsayers will continue to cry in their beer but we are going to end up with all but one of GWs nominees more here

[ken5050]

Did you hear Grahan on the Senate floor..about 11am this morning?..That's the transcript we need to find?..and when C-span reruns it.you must catch it..

[AFPhys]

I agree :::

McCain is the MAJOR problem here.

I will never vote for him. Never. I will send any opponent of his cash. I will pray for his demise.

[Dawgreg]

Oooooooh Sparky, your so strict! *~* (The part about switching parties that is). LOL

[fooman]

dewino would not have sunk this by himself.

This all about bogus power.

[ken5050]

Cboldt..pls see my #28 here..can you help us out..I lost that search link you gave us yesterday..actually, i didn;t lose it, it's on my puter, I can't find it..LOL

[goodn'mad]

Here is the email I just sent to Senator Graham:
Senator Graham,

I see you've caved on the matter of judicial filibusters by the Democrats and that is your perogative. I will now exercise my perogative as a voter. You sir, will not get my vote again. I will also vote for whomever opposes you in the Republican primary.

If it was just this one issue, I'd probably overlook it. But anymore, I don't know what you stand for or where you are coming from. Acturally, I think that I'd rather vote for a liberal democrat than for you. At least I know what THEY stand for.

You'd be wise to listen up. There are many other conservatives out here in the hinderlands who think as I do.

A very disgruntled voter,

My Name

[AFPhys]

I didn't catch it - there's some way to get the Senate record from their web site, but I don't have time to dig that up now. I have to leave here real soon...

One certain thing, at least if he's being candid:
Graham is on a hair trigger with this "extraordinary circumstances" and filibuster. He is really counting on honesty from these Demo's in on the agreement, and if they don't come through, that will be "all she wrote" - is he wrong? He admits the possibility, but hopes not.

I also believe that those "five certain NO's" could easily turn into 4 or three if the D's break their agreement. (rumors have it...)

[bray]

The Good news is that McCain and Graham will never win higher office in our Party. The base will support them just as these two supported us.

Pray for W and Our Troops

[Steven W.]

Since the DemoncRATs have already broken the agreement Limpy Graham looks like a total fool and idiot.

[Bar-Face]

I was doing a little channel surfing last night and stopped in on C-Span II for a few minutes. After watching Senator Boxer patiently explaining the Constitution and Senate rules to the slow witted Republicans, I can only hope and pray that the other Democrats will be more gracious than she was now that they are firmly in control of the US Senate.

[Guillermo]

"And queer as a football bat all of the time."

[cogitator]

I'm glad you think with your head and not your knees!

[af_vet_1981]

There are FIVE SOLID NOs against the Constitutional option. There are 4 or 5 unknown.

This is the heart of the problem.