How do you feel about the Charge of the Light Brigade?
No matter whether there is one or three vacancies on the United States Supreme Court, whether the hearings on replacement(s) begin in August or September, or whether Democrats make or break their "deal" and filibuster based on ideology, one thing is almost certainly going to happen: Mainstream media coverage of the battle will be biased against the Bush nominee(s) from the crack of the first gavel.http://www.worldmag.com/hughhewitt/hewitt.cfm?id=18063
Hugh Hewett - Lions' den - Jul 16, 2005
GOP leaders, sensing the Democrats' bind, expressed confidence yesterday that the Senate will confirm Bush's eventual nominee, no matter how ideologically rigid. "I think there is every expectation, every reason to believe that there will be no successful filibuster," Majority Whip Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said on "Fox News Sunday."Under the "Gang of 14" accord, the seven Republican signers agreed to deny Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.) the votes he needed to carry out his threat to bar judicial filibusters by changing Senate rules. The seven are implicitly released from the deal if the Democratic signers renege on their end. Yesterday, key players suggested the seven Democrats will automatically be in default if they contend a nominee's ideological views constitute "extraordinary circumstances" that would justify a filibuster.
Sen. Lindsey O. Graham (R-S.C.), one of the 14 signers, noted that the accord allowed the confirmation of three Bush appellate court nominees so conservative that Democrats had successfully filibustered them for years: Janice Rogers Brown, William H. Pryor Jr. and Priscilla R. Owen. Because Democrats accepted them under the deal, Graham said on the Fox program, it is clear that ideological differences will not justify a filibuster of a Supreme Court nominee.
"Based on what we've done in the past with Brown, Pryor and Owen," Graham said, "ideological attacks are not an 'extraordinary circumstance.' To me, it would have to be a character problem, an ethics problem, some allegation about the qualifications of the person, not an ideological bent."
Sen. Ben Nelson (Neb.), a leader of the seven Democratic signers, largely concurred. Nelson "would agree that ideology is not an 'extraordinary circumstance' unless you get to the extreme of either side," his spokesman, David DiMartino, said in an interview.
Pact May Hinder Efforts to Block High Court Nominee
By Charles Babington and Susan Schmidt
Washington Post Staff Writers
Monday, July 4, 2005; Page A01
Love it. Since Repubs outnumber the dems in the senate, it shouldn't even be an issue.
Concur, but it is central to the issue at hand.
The "gang of 14" spokesmen said months ago that they would not stand for filibusters based on ideology. Therefore I fail to see the f'ing problem.
The "f'ing problem" is Arlen.S who is not the spokesman you refer to and would have killed their nominations in the committee he should not chair.