LIVE THREAD - Senate Debate on John G. Roberts for Chief Justice (Confirmed by a vote of 78

You are right that the next person has a class act to follow.

561 posted on 09/29/2005 12:12:26 PM PDT by RobFromGa (Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran-- what are we waiting for?)

I think Ann was just uneasy because we did not know anything about him and the last time a stealth candidate was nominated, we got burned.

562 posted on 09/29/2005 12:12:55 PM PDT by Eagle of Liberty (11, 175, 77, 93 - In Memory Always)

563 posted on 09/29/2005 12:13:13 PM PDT by Lovergirl (Congratulations Chief Justice Roberts.)

GOOD...I like Ann...and was hating that she was so against him...

I just pray she never has reason to say..."I told you so.."

564 posted on 09/29/2005 12:13:24 PM PDT by Txsleuth (Mike Pence for President of the United States!)

565 posted on 09/29/2005 12:14:34 PM PDT by hipaatwo

I suggest you pay close attention to the next hearing. I wonder if you will claim the person looks less than honest when he/she refers to notes. Very few people could pull off what John Roberts did in that hearing and none of the previous nominees in the modern era have done so.

566 posted on 09/29/2005 12:14:59 PM PDT by RummyChick

BREAKING NEWS! DRUDGE SIREN! MUST READ! LIVE THREAD! ZOTTED HEADLINE! RED ALERT! Developing

Wasn't it Dan Rather who said, "I just BROKE MY NEWS!!!! It can never be repaired!!!"

567 posted on 09/29/2005 12:16:41 PM PDT by Common Tator

Additional breakdowns of the vote:

U.S. Senate Roll Call Votes 109^th Congress - 1^st Session

as compiled through Senate LIS by the Senate Bill Clerk under the direction of the Secretary of the Senate

Vote Summary

Question: On the Nomination (Confirmation John G. Roberts, Jr., of Maryland, to be Chief Justice of the United States )
Vote Number:	245	Vote Date:	September 29, 2005, 11:31 AM
Required For Majority:	1/2	Vote Result:	Nomination Confirmed
Nomination Number:	PN801
Nomination Description:	John G. Roberts, Jr., of Maryland, to be Chief Justice of the United States

Vote Counts:	YEAs	78
	NAYs	22

Alphabetical by Senator Name

Akaka (D-HI), Nay
Alexander (R-TN), Yea
Allard (R-CO), Yea
Allen (R-VA), Yea
Baucus (D-MT), Yea
Bayh (D-IN), Nay
Bennett (R-UT), Yea
Biden (D-DE), Nay
Bingaman (D-NM), Yea
Bond (R-MO), Yea
Boxer (D-CA), Nay
Brownback (R-KS), Yea
Bunning (R-KY), Yea
Burns (R-MT), Yea
Burr (R-NC), Yea
Byrd (D-WV), Yea
Cantwell (D-WA), Nay
Carper (D-DE), Yea
Chafee (R-RI), Yea
Chambliss (R-GA), Yea
Clinton (D-NY), Nay
Coburn (R-OK), Yea
Cochran (R-MS), Yea
Coleman (R-MN), Yea
Collins (R-ME), Yea
Conrad (D-ND), Yea
Cornyn (R-TX), Yea
Corzine (D-NJ), Nay
Craig (R-ID), Yea
Crapo (R-ID), Yea
Dayton (D-MN), Nay
DeMint (R-SC), Yea
DeWine (R-OH), Yea
Dodd (D-CT), Yea

Dole (R-NC), Yea
Domenici (R-NM), Yea
Dorgan (D-ND), Yea
Durbin (D-IL), Nay
Ensign (R-NV), Yea
Enzi (R-WY), Yea
Feingold (D-WI), Yea
Feinstein (D-CA), Nay
Frist (R-TN), Yea
Graham (R-SC), Yea
Grassley (R-IA), Yea
Gregg (R-NH), Yea
Hagel (R-NE), Yea
Harkin (D-IA), Nay
Hatch (R-UT), Yea
Hutchison (R-TX), Yea
Inhofe (R-OK), Yea
Inouye (D-HI), Nay
Isakson (R-GA), Yea
Jeffords (I-VT), Yea
Johnson (D-SD), Yea
Kennedy (D-MA), Nay
Kerry (D-MA), Nay
Kohl (D-WI), Yea
Kyl (R-AZ), Yea
Landrieu (D-LA), Yea
Lautenberg (D-NJ), Nay
Leahy (D-VT), Yea
Levin (D-MI), Yea
Lieberman (D-CT), Yea
Lincoln (D-AR), Yea
Lott (R-MS), Yea
Lugar (R-IN), Yea
Martinez (R-FL), Yea

McCain (R-AZ), Yea
McConnell (R-KY), Yea
Mikulski (D-MD), Nay
Murkowski (R-AK), Yea
Murray (D-WA), Yea
Nelson (D-FL), Yea
Nelson (D-NE), Yea
Obama (D-IL), Nay
Pryor (D-AR), Yea
Reed (D-RI), Nay
Reid (D-NV), Nay
Roberts (R-KS), Yea
Rockefeller (D-WV), Yea
Salazar (D-CO), Yea
Santorum (R-PA), Yea
Sarbanes (D-MD), Nay
Schumer (D-NY), Nay
Sessions (R-AL), Yea
Shelby (R-AL), Yea
Smith (R-OR), Yea
Snowe (R-ME), Yea
Specter (R-PA), Yea
Stabenow (D-MI), Nay
Stevens (R-AK), Yea
Sununu (R-NH), Yea
Talent (R-MO), Yea
Thomas (R-WY), Yea
Thune (R-SD), Yea
Vitter (R-LA), Yea
Voinovich (R-OH), Yea
Warner (R-VA), Yea
Wyden (D-OR), Yea

Grouped By Vote Position

YEAs ---78
Alexander (R-TN) Allard (R-CO) Allen (R-VA) Baucus (D-MT) Bennett (R-UT) Bingaman (D-NM) Bond (R-MO) Brownback (R-KS) Bunning (R-KY) Burns (R-MT) Burr (R-NC) Byrd (D-WV) Carper (D-DE) Chafee (R-RI) Chambliss (R-GA) Coburn (R-OK) Cochran (R-MS) Coleman (R-MN) Collins (R-ME) Conrad (D-ND) Cornyn (R-TX) Craig (R-ID) Crapo (R-ID) DeMint (R-SC) DeWine (R-OH) Dodd (D-CT)	Dole (R-NC) Domenici (R-NM) Dorgan (D-ND) Ensign (R-NV) Enzi (R-WY) Feingold (D-WI) Frist (R-TN) Graham (R-SC) Grassley (R-IA) Gregg (R-NH) Hagel (R-NE) Hatch (R-UT) Hutchison (R-TX) Inhofe (R-OK) Isakson (R-GA) Jeffords (I-VT) Johnson (D-SD) Kohl (D-WI) Kyl (R-AZ) Landrieu (D-LA) Leahy (D-VT) Levin (D-MI) Lieberman (D-CT) Lincoln (D-AR) Lott (R-MS) Lugar (R-IN)	Martinez (R-FL) McCain (R-AZ) McConnell (R-KY) Murkowski (R-AK) Murray (D-WA) Nelson (D-FL) Nelson (D-NE) Pryor (D-AR) Roberts (R-KS) Rockefeller (D-WV) Salazar (D-CO) Santorum (R-PA) Sessions (R-AL) Shelby (R-AL) Smith (R-OR) Snowe (R-ME) Specter (R-PA) Stevens (R-AK) Sununu (R-NH) Talent (R-MO) Thomas (R-WY) Thune (R-SD) Vitter (R-LA) Voinovich (R-OH) Warner (R-VA) Wyden (D-OR)

NAYs ---22
Akaka (D-HI) Bayh (D-IN) Biden (D-DE) Boxer (D-CA) Cantwell (D-WA) Clinton (D-NY) Corzine (D-NJ) Dayton (D-MN)	Durbin (D-IL) Feinstein (D-CA) Harkin (D-IA) Inouye (D-HI) Kennedy (D-MA) Kerry (D-MA) Lautenberg (D-NJ) Mikulski (D-MD)	Obama (D-IL) Reed (D-RI) Reid (D-NV) Sarbanes (D-MD) Schumer (D-NY) Stabenow (D-MI)

Grouped by Home State

Alabama:	Sessions (R-AL), Yea	Shelby (R-AL), Yea
Alaska:	Murkowski (R-AK), Yea	Stevens (R-AK), Yea
Arizona:	Kyl (R-AZ), Yea	McCain (R-AZ), Yea
Arkansas:	Lincoln (D-AR), Yea	Pryor (D-AR), Yea
California:	Boxer (D-CA), Nay	Feinstein (D-CA), Nay
Colorado:	Allard (R-CO), Yea	Salazar (D-CO), Yea
Connecticut:	Dodd (D-CT), Yea	Lieberman (D-CT), Yea
Delaware:	Biden (D-DE), Nay	Carper (D-DE), Yea
Florida:	Martinez (R-FL), Yea	Nelson (D-FL), Yea
Georgia:	Chambliss (R-GA), Yea	Isakson (R-GA), Yea
Hawaii:	Akaka (D-HI), Nay	Inouye (D-HI), Nay
Idaho:	Craig (R-ID), Yea	Crapo (R-ID), Yea
Illinois:	Durbin (D-IL), Nay	Obama (D-IL), Nay
Indiana:	Bayh (D-IN), Nay	Lugar (R-IN), Yea
Iowa:	Grassley (R-IA), Yea	Harkin (D-IA), Nay
Kansas:	Brownback (R-KS), Yea	Roberts (R-KS), Yea
Kentucky:	Bunning (R-KY), Yea	McConnell (R-KY), Yea
Louisiana:	Landrieu (D-LA), Yea	Vitter (R-LA), Yea
Maine:	Collins (R-ME), Yea	Snowe (R-ME), Yea
Maryland:	Mikulski (D-MD), Nay	Sarbanes (D-MD), Nay
Massachusetts:	Kennedy (D-MA), Nay	Kerry (D-MA), Nay
Michigan:	Levin (D-MI), Yea	Stabenow (D-MI), Nay
Minnesota:	Coleman (R-MN), Yea	Dayton (D-MN), Nay
Mississippi:	Cochran (R-MS), Yea	Lott (R-MS), Yea
Missouri:	Bond (R-MO), Yea	Talent (R-MO), Yea
Montana:	Baucus (D-MT), Yea	Burns (R-MT), Yea
Nebraska:	Hagel (R-NE), Yea	Nelson (D-NE), Yea
Nevada:	Ensign (R-NV), Yea	Reid (D-NV), Nay
New Hampshire:	Gregg (R-NH), Yea	Sununu (R-NH), Yea
New Jersey:	Corzine (D-NJ), Nay	Lautenberg (D-NJ), Nay
New Mexico:	Bingaman (D-NM), Yea	Domenici (R-NM), Yea
New York:	Clinton (D-NY), Nay	Schumer (D-NY), Nay
North Carolina:	Burr (R-NC), Yea	Dole (R-NC), Yea
North Dakota:	Conrad (D-ND), Yea	Dorgan (D-ND), Yea
Ohio:	DeWine (R-OH), Yea	Voinovich (R-OH), Yea
Oklahoma:	Coburn (R-OK), Yea	Inhofe (R-OK), Yea
Oregon:	Smith (R-OR), Yea	Wyden (D-OR), Yea
Pennsylvania:	Santorum (R-PA), Yea	Specter (R-PA), Yea
Rhode Island:	Chafee (R-RI), Yea	Reed (D-RI), Nay
South Carolina:	DeMint (R-SC), Yea	Graham (R-SC), Yea
South Dakota:	Johnson (D-SD), Yea	Thune (R-SD), Yea
Tennessee:	Alexander (R-TN), Yea	Frist (R-TN), Yea
Texas:	Cornyn (R-TX), Yea	Hutchison (R-TX), Yea
Utah:	Bennett (R-UT), Yea	Hatch (R-UT), Yea
Vermont:	Jeffords (I-VT), Yea	Leahy (D-VT), Yea
Virginia:	Allen (R-VA), Yea	Warner (R-VA), Yea
Washington:	Cantwell (D-WA), Nay	Murray (D-WA), Yea
West Virginia:	Byrd (D-WV), Yea	Rockefeller (D-WV), Yea
Wisconsin:	Feingold (D-WI), Yea	Kohl (D-WI), Yea
Wyoming:	Enzi (R-WY), Yea	Thomas (R-WY), Yea

568 posted on 09/29/2005 12:18:07 PM PDT by Salvation (†With God all things are possible.†)

I agree, John Roberts was spectacular in the hearings. He is a natural, and extremely intelligent. I think we have a winner.

569 posted on 09/29/2005 12:24:08 PM PDT by RobFromGa (Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran-- what are we waiting for?)

7 members of SCOTUS - wonder which is missing?

Attending the swearing-in ceremony were are all the members of the Supreme Court, save Justice Antonin Scalia who had a previous engagement, McClellan said. The widows of Justices Thurgood Marshall and Potter Stewart also were in attendance.

570 posted on 09/29/2005 12:26:40 PM PDT by Cboldt

The Biggest Winner!

The Biggest Loser!

571 posted on 09/29/2005 12:42:43 PM PDT by OESY

That's Schmuck Schumer, neo-Marxist-Leninist.

572 posted on 09/29/2005 12:57:00 PM PDT by foofoopowder

To: foofoopowder

Right you are:

That's Chuck Schumer, The Biggest Loser --
missing in action from Post #571.

573 posted on 09/29/2005 2:48:27 PM PDT by OESY

well, I got
JUDGE EDITH HOLLAN JONES

why, I don't know

574 posted on 09/29/2005 2:57:57 PM PDT by fqued (You don't have to fight every fight, you don't have to win every battle.)

To: Pan_Yans Wife

The Big R saw it in a Gilbert & Sullivan play, and decided he wanted strips on his sleeves.

575 posted on 09/29/2005 3:00:14 PM PDT by fqued (You don't have to fight every fight, you don't have to win every battle.)

78 yea votes means that 23 Democrats voted for him. If the Democrats try to filibuster the next nominee, how many of those 23 do you think will not filibuster? We don't need many of them. . . .

576 posted on 09/29/2005 3:08:59 PM PDT by fqued (You don't have to fight every fight, you don't have to win every battle.)

Have you received your membership card in The Donner Party yet?

best line on this thread

577 posted on 09/29/2005 3:17:46 PM PDT by fqued (You don't have to fight every fight, you don't have to win every battle.)

It's hard to say. There weren't many surprises in the vote - it was mostly the most liberal of the Democrats who voted against the nomination. They need to get 17 of them back on side to allow the filibuster to go ahead.

What happens if there is NO filibuster but the up-or-down vote comes out with majority opposed (i.e. some Republicans go against the nomination)?

578 posted on 09/29/2005 3:27:29 PM PDT by Heartofsong83

To: Senator Kunte Klinte

Let's Humor Schumer

New York's other senator took to the Senate floor today and issued a threat, the Associated Press reports:

"If the president sends us a nominee who is committed to an agenda of turning back the clock on civil rights, workers' rights, individual autonomy or other vital constitutional protections, there will likely be a fight," said Sen. Charles Schumer of New York, chairman of the Democrats' Senate campaign committee and a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee.

We happened to catch these remarks on C-Span, and the funniest part is the next line, which the AP left out: "And Mr. President, it will be a fight without any winners."

Someone might want to explain to Schumer that politics is a zero-sum game, which means that if a fight has losers, it has to have winners too. For example, Tom Daschle waged a "fight" by filibustering Bush judicial nominees. Among the winners that fight produced were John Thune, who now holds Daschle's former seat, and Harry Reid, who now leads the (less numerous) Senate Democrats. If Schumer thinks there won't be any winners in this fight, that probably means he's confident his side will lose.

-- BEST OF THE WEB TODAY, 9/28/05

579 posted on 09/29/2005 7:07:27 PM PDT by OESY

Because we are talking about the Supreme Court, I don't think there will be a filibuster, unless Bork is renominated and that's not going to happen. The people in this country want to hear from the nominee, hear a lively if not always engaging debate, and see the Senate do its job. If the Republicans come across as toeing the party line instead of carefully and cogently considering the nominee's background, views and credentials on all the hot button issues, then the Democrats might be able to gain in the next election cycle. But I think the Democrats will suffer a worse fate if they filibuster, particularly now that the Roberts hearing impressed the nation.

It does depend, to some extent, on the nominee. If Luttig or Jones is nominated, as I hope, their track records will make the dims go ballistic. Nevertheless, with O'Conner vowing to remain on the bench until the next nominee is confirmed, all it would take would be for her to piss off the dims with one opinion to make them rethink the idea of keeping her up there with a filibuster. And if she wants retirement bad enough, as I believe she does, she'd do it in a heartbeat.

So I'm thinking we'd get at least 6 of those red state dim senators to refuse to filibuster, to answer your question.

580 posted on 09/29/2005 8:21:10 PM PDT by Kryptonite

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794