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

Skip to comments.

Roberts Picks Up Democratic Support
ap on Yahoo ^ | 9/21/05 | Jesse J. Holland - ap

Posted on 09/21/2005 1:55:53 PM PDT by NormsRevenge

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-117 next last
To: Ninian Dryhope

Poor Norman Lear. So much money spent, so little influence.


41 posted on 09/21/2005 3:12:51 PM PDT by popdonnelly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: xzins

"Old Republicans"? Well, you've got Scalia and Thomas. Both of them have a good ten years left. You've got Souter (appointed by 41). He hasn't done us any favors recently. That leaves you with Stevens (appointed by Ford). He's got it in his will that he should be stuffed and propped into his Seat should he die before another Dem is elected Prez.

So now you're left with a guy completely unacceptable to strict constructionists on the court.


42 posted on 09/21/2005 3:15:51 PM PDT by WinOne4TheGipper (Please don't feed the tagline.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge

Has the Hill-debeast announced her intentions, yet?


43 posted on 09/21/2005 3:46:34 PM PDT by SmithL (There are a lot of people that hate Bush more than they hate terrorists)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge
President Bush has wanted John Roberts to be Chief Justice since he was elected in 2000. The "Teflon Bork" will be the Libs worst nightmare.
44 posted on 09/21/2005 3:47:54 PM PDT by new yorker 77 (FAKE POLLS DO NOT TRANSLATE INTO REAL VOTERS!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SmithL

Not yet, but I'd bet she votes
No altho it wouldn't surprise me if she voted Yes.


45 posted on 09/21/2005 3:51:03 PM PDT by NormsRevenge (Semper Fi ... "To remain silent when they should protest makes cowards of men." -- THOMAS JEFFERSON)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge
I wonder what the motive here is. The best strategy is to show a united front. All the D's vote no, but no filibuster and it gives them credentials for the next one. I thought that Harry Reid's announcement was not after meeting with party leaders but as a pre-emptive strike. He was trying to make the others vote with him.

This may be Leaky's attempt at a little power struggle.

46 posted on 09/21/2005 3:58:36 PM PDT by AmishDude (Join the AmishDude fan club: "Great point." -- AliVertias; ":-) Very clever" -- MJY1288)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: patent; xzins

Gonzales is very unlikely to be nominated. As sitting AG, he would have to recuse himself from far too many cases.


47 posted on 09/21/2005 4:00:08 PM PDT by AmishDude (Join the AmishDude fan club: "Great point." -- AliVertias; ":-) Very clever" -- MJY1288)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge
"It would be quite a sacrifice for her, but she's prepared to do it if she is asked," Specter said. "By next June we'll know a lot more about Judge Roberts ... than we do today."

You couldn't possibly be suggesting that the next nominee should be determined by the political leanings of Judge Roberts' first year rulings, could you Arlen?

48 posted on 09/21/2005 4:11:28 PM PDT by agrace (Where were you when I founded the earth? Tell me if you know so much. Job 38:4)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge

I'm betting she votes yes, just to prove she's not an extreme liberal.


49 posted on 09/21/2005 4:17:50 PM PDT by SmithL (There are a lot of people that hate Bush more than they hate terrorists)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge

Biden's a NO.

Senator Joseph Biden (D-Del.) will vote against the confirmation of John G. Roberts as Chief Justice of the United States, a source who has spoken to the senator told The Huffington Post.

Last Wednesday, Biden told Roberts, "We're rolling the dice with you, judge because you won't share your views with us. You've told me nothing in this Kabuki dance. The public has a right to know what you think."

Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid announced he would vote against Robert’s confirmation yesterday.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2005/09/21/biden-to-vote-against-rob_n_7684.html


Whatever. Its completely ridiculous how this is a 100% political process and these senators whore out their votes. No wonder it takes 3 months for nominees to get confirmed.


50 posted on 09/21/2005 5:05:17 PM PDT by zendari
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SmithL
It's amusing to read that these vote announcements signify a "split" or a "power struggle" in the Dim ranks.

The votes are orchestrated already. Things like the makeup of the individual senator's voting base, the safeness of his/her seat and other factors all play a part.

The leader knows what final vote pro and con among his ranks will be satisfactory for public consumption and for the strategy for the next nomination.......and 'Rat senators will play their part so the vote comes out as planned.

The votes are written in stone already by both parties.

All the breastbeating and all the pious announcements right now are beanbag.

Leni

51 posted on 09/21/2005 5:11:13 PM PDT by MinuteGal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Pearls Before Swine
Now that you're warmed up, could you tell us what you think of Ginsburg? LOL

Ginsberg was different. Oconner served on what, some state level court of appeals for 2 years before her nomination? Ginsberg was on the DC circuit for years before hers. Plus Clinton knew what he wanted when he chose RBG and got it. Reagan had no clue.

52 posted on 09/21/2005 5:20:18 PM PDT by zendari
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: zendari

And Boxer too.

WASHINGTON - Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., announced Wednesday that she will oppose the nomination of John Roberts to be Supreme Court chief justice.

http://www.sanluisobispo.com/mld/sanluisobispo/12706405.htm


53 posted on 09/21/2005 5:30:46 PM PDT by zendari
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: MinuteGal

I agree; it's pure theater which Dems will vote yes or no. The lesser Dems will do what the leadership says they can do.


54 posted on 09/21/2005 5:56:12 PM PDT by alwaysconservative (You're just jealous because the voices talk only to ME.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: zendari

Okay, most of the moonbats have reported that they'll vote "no". Now let's see what the "moderate" Dems are allowed to do.


55 posted on 09/21/2005 5:57:17 PM PDT by alwaysconservative (You're just jealous because the voices talk only to ME.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge
Other Democrats, including Tim Johnson of South Dakota and Max Baucus of Montana, also have announced their support. Ben Nelson of Nebraska and Mary Landrieu of Louisiana are leaning toward voting for Roberts, and Kent Conrad of North Dakota is viewed as a possible vote for him as well.

All from states that Bush carried. That is not a coincidence.

56 posted on 09/21/2005 5:59:06 PM PDT by NeoCaveman (I support Mike Pence and Operation Offset)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pearls Before Swine
Now that you're warmed up, could you tell us what you think of Ginsburg? LOL

Really I'd like to but the endless stream of profanity would overload the server. Think of the children.

ha ha

57 posted on 09/21/2005 6:08:48 PM PDT by XpandTheEkonomy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: dubyaismypresident

Conrad and Dorgan of ND (a true red state) will decide who is closest to election and that one will vote for what the President wants while the other will solemnly vote "his conscience" (barf). It's political calculation and cynicism at their very worst.


58 posted on 09/21/2005 6:09:23 PM PDT by alwaysconservative (You're just jealous because the voices talk only to ME.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: zendari; XpandTheEkonomy
Plus Clinton knew what he wanted when he chose RBG and got it. Reagan had no clue.

No argument on that aspect of it. I was enjoying XpandTheEkonomy's choice words for O'Connor and hoping he'd have an equally tart and enjoyable description of RBG. She's a lot worse than O'Connor, even if Clinton knew it in advance.

59 posted on 09/21/2005 6:12:17 PM PDT by Pearls Before Swine (Is /sarc really needed?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: Pearls Before Swine
No argument on that aspect of it. I was enjoying XpandTheEkonomy's choice words for O'Connor and hoping he'd have an equally tart and enjoyable description of RBG. She's a lot worse than O'Connor, even if Clinton knew it in advance.

I think he's right. Oconner was chosen because she was a woman. Ginsberg was chosen because she was as liberal a candidate as Clinton could easily get through the Senate under Orrin Hatch's watch without a huge fight, and happened to be a woman. With Bork and Thomas in recent past I hardly blame him. Is she worse than Oconner? Yes. But I can live with Ginsberg. She is at least honest, its traitors like Souter that really piss me off.

60 posted on 09/21/2005 6:34:06 PM PDT by zendari
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-117 next last

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.

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