Posted on 10/01/2005 3:54:19 AM PDT by stocksthatgoup
Twenty-four hours before Chief Justice John Roberts's confirmation, Sen. Chuck Schumer of New York took to the Senate floor and issued a threat: If the president, when replacing Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, "sends us a nominee who is committed to an agenda of turning back the clock, . . . there will likely be a fight." Like John Kerry's "Bring it on," this may turn out to be all bluster and no bite. After all, Republicans hold a majority in the Senate. Not since LBJ's abortive elevation of Justice Abe Fortas to chief 37 years ago has a Supreme Court nominee faced a serious challenge in a Senate controlled by the president's party.
(Excerpt) Read more at opinionjournal.com ...
(Denny Crane: "Sometimes you can only look for answers from God and failing that... and Fox News".)
Give a real conservative and then stand back to watch the left go moonbats.
You give him too much credit.
Whoever Mr. Bush picks. he had better check their background , because if that nominee ever so much as sassed their Momma the Dems are going to drag it thru the mud.
Chuck Schumer and his gang of no-nothings Kings of the mud slingers.
If W handles this right, and there is no reason to think he won't, this nominee will be a splendid conservative. When the hearings start, the rats will HAVE to make stupid statements to suck up to the America haters that run their party.
All you "pundits" who are telling us how much trouble the GOP is in, please explain the down side for us in this one.
What would really drive Schumer crazy would be if Bush sought a writ of mandamus to force the Senate to perform its Constitutional duty to advise and consent. Bush could argue although the Senate has absolute right to make its own rules on how to conduct it business, the rules cannot be such as to produce unconstituional results. For example, could the Senate promulgate a rule that excluded blacks or women from sitting on committees? Senate rules must muster the constitutional test as any legislation they pass must.
The excerpt-only rule applies downthread too.
A writ of mandamus is the action which eventually led to klintoon's legal license being suspended for five years.
Wimp Frist will lead the charge. Right ?
...and she was elected by the people of California (not known for their right-wing leanings) multiple times.
Further the Democrats would use those on the far left to continue to intimidate them with charges (such as "Republicans = Nazi" and starve old people, and in general are just evil.
If the administration would take the bait and attempt to defend themselves, what ever was said would be taken out of context, and used (by the MSM) to demonize the administration.
So this administration came into office with a plan, ignore the left, ignore the baseless charges, ignore everything but the agenda. This has driven the left crazy, and their response has been to make even more outlandish charges and attempt to make anything the administration does a "scandal" (up to and including blaming them for a hurricane)
Here we are five years into this administration and the net result is that people are beginning to question the sanity of those on the left, but more importantly, they have mostly tuned them out.
We are now at a point where in any dispute where the average person may not have any personal knowledge but must choose a side to support they are going to give the benefit of doubt to the administration rather then the Democrats.
President Bush can nominate the most far right wing Republican he can find, and the response from the Democrats would be the same if he nominates a moderate. So why not go for it?
By spending five years obstructing everything the administration does, when it finally comes down to something that is really important, they have diluted their influence. In the court of public opinion, they have zero credibility. The Democrats traded the most valuable coin in the political world (credibility) for cheap political hits.
If I was to guess, I would say it is because in the past, when the MSM was the gatekeeper of “the News” they could get away with it, and even today they know something is wrong, but can not quite understand just what. (Hint for any Democrat leaders reading this, it is the internet stupid!).
If the Democrats were smart (I said “if”) they would have cooperated with the administration on the small stuff, allowing the President some victories with smart from the moderate Democrats, and only fight on the important stuff, but to the Democrats (like a selfish child unwilling to share their toys with anyone) everything is important, and so they fight over everything.
I think President Bush allowed the Democrats to “block” his judicial appointments with the next Supreme Court nomination in mind. Instead of going into this fight with a record of non-partisanship, they have a record of obstructions. So, if they do attempt to filibuster, the Republicans can use the “Nuke” option without fear of any back lash from middle America (the left will go ballistic, but they do regardless).
As someone else pointed out years ago, this man, President Bush is playing chess while everyone else is playing checkers.
What an excellent analysis! Perhaps you should make sure a few on our side read it, too.
Aren't you eager to read the story of what went on behind the scenes in this administration? I doubt that President Bush will do an autobiography, but I certainly hope someone does a biography of the President...perhaps Bill Sammon.
a)this is the same speech he gave before the justice roberts nomination
b)it sucks when your best senator is hillary clinton by far and away
You give him too much credit.
Yeah, all of us who really are pipsqueak blowhards are going to kick your ass. As soon as I finish my sandwich.
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.