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

Skip to comments.

Vote delay on Bush court pick
Herald Sun ^ | 17 January 2006

Posted on 01/16/2006 7:49:10 PM PST by Aussie Dasher

OPPOSITION Democrats have gained a one-week delay for a key Senate panel's vote on President George W. Bush's Supreme Court nominee, Samuel Alito.

Senator Patrick Leahy, the top Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee, said the panel's Republican chairman, Senator Arlen Specter, had agree to hold the vote on January 24 instead of today (local time).

"I have assured Chairman Specter that no Democratic Senator will hold the matter over on January 24," Senator Leahy said. "He does not anticipate that any Republican Senator will seek to hold it over at that time."

Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, a Tennessee Republican, blasted the Democrats' move as "unjustified and desperate partisan obstructionism".

"After answering 700 questions for over 18 hours before the committee last week and enduring relentless personal attacks, Judge Alito deserves better," Senator Frist said.

But he predicted that Judge Alito was "on track" to win confirmation in the full Senate, where Republicans hold 55 of 100 seats. His nomination must first be endorsed by the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Senator Frist vowed to schedule a Senate debate the day after the judge was endorsed by the judiciary committee and "move swiftly to a fair up-or-down vote."

"A Justice delayed will not be a Justice denied," Senator Frist said.

During committee hearings last week, Democrats, concerned that Mr Bush's high court pick was too conservative for their taste, grilled Judge Alito about abortion rights, limits on presidential powers and civil rights.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Front Page News; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: 109th; alito; alitohearings; alitovote; arlenbloodyspecter; dopeydems; justicealito; obstructionistdems; obstructionistrats; scotus; senaterats; ussenate
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-105 next last
To: Txsleuth

What are you talking about? Who is praying for Ford to die?


41 posted on 01/16/2006 9:07:55 PM PST by Howlin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Aussie Dasher

Bend over....damn RINO's!


42 posted on 01/16/2006 9:08:38 PM PST by olinr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Soul Seeker

Exactly.


43 posted on 01/16/2006 9:11:29 PM PST by Howlin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: oceanview
the Dems have 41 votes for a filibuster

Says who?

44 posted on 01/16/2006 9:13:11 PM PST by Howlin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: rwfromkansas
"There isn't really much specter can do...my understanding of this is that it is a little-known provision in the Senate rules that allow a delay on a nomination vote of up to a week. He can't really stop it if this is the case. "

Some on this thread have stated that the dims got their one week delay up front. How many one week delays is specter gonna give them, and why is the question.

45 posted on 01/16/2006 9:14:17 PM PST by de Buillion (Is 3500 aborted babies each day enough?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: VRWCmember

Right - he gave them their delay based on an agreement not to invoke the rule. They lied and invoked the rule anyway. I don't really think it makes a difference - Alito will be on the Court and the Democrats are once again exposed as liars.


46 posted on 01/16/2006 9:14:36 PM PST by Republican Wildcat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: de Buillion

I was not aware of that. If true, Specter did cave.


47 posted on 01/16/2006 9:16:41 PM PST by rwfromkansas (http://www.xanga.com/rwfromkansas)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Aussie Dasher
The dems are probably trying to find some bimbo to claim he raped her or something similar. They can then say "the gravity of the accusation makes it impossible to confirm Judge Alito at this time" and a handful of completely spineless Republicans will dutifully trot along with the dems.

I wouldn't put ANYTHING past the Democrats.

48 posted on 01/16/2006 9:17:23 PM PST by jess35
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Natty Bumppo@frontier.net
"Arlen Specter repeatedly demonstrates a lack of testicular fortitude. He makes Jumpin' Jim Jeffords look respectable. "

Hell, he makes Bagdad Bob appear reliable!

49 posted on 01/16/2006 9:17:42 PM PST by de Buillion (Is 3500 aborted babies each day enough?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Republican Wildcat

Thanks for your post. The knee-jerk ignorance of so many freepers on this thread is distressing.


50 posted on 01/16/2006 9:20:35 PM PST by Lancey Howard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Terpfen

The Losers have another week to dig for dirt.


51 posted on 01/16/2006 9:22:33 PM PST by demlosers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Dog
"Is Ford that bad off?"

The news guys are playing down the seroiusness of his his condition...said he'd leave the hospital next Wednesday.

52 posted on 01/16/2006 9:25:13 PM PST by blam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: rwfromkansas
"The democrats have already had their week delay. Specter delayed the hearings based on an agreement with the democrats to take their delay up front. He should have held the hearings in December rather than compromising with democrats. 21 posted on 01/16/2006 10:12:09 PM CST by VRWCmember "

This is the reply that I remembered.

53 posted on 01/16/2006 9:28:32 PM PST by de Buillion (Pedophiles, Perverts, and child sexual predators- It's partytime in Vermont, Y'all come on up!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: rwfromkansas

Specter gave them a one week delay up front as part of a gentleman's agreement that the Dems would not invoke the delay rule after the hearings had concluded. The Democrats agreed. They lied to Specter and invoked the rule anyway, thus, another week delay.


54 posted on 01/16/2006 9:29:15 PM PST by Republican Wildcat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Terpfen

My first thought, too: when's the State of the Union speech? Answer: January 31.


55 posted on 01/16/2006 9:29:46 PM PST by La Enchiladita (Taking a stand and speaking up imperil one's health, but friends false and true are thereby known.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Natty Bumppo@frontier.net
I gotta give Arlen props for layin' the smackdown on the Senior Senator Fat Drunken Murderer from Massechussets the other day.
56 posted on 01/16/2006 9:31:09 PM PST by lesser_satan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Lancey Howard

It's not just this thread. You'd think people here that read the news on a regular basis would be more up to snuff on their civics but apparently not. Everyone who has been following this story should be well aware of this Senate rule.


57 posted on 01/16/2006 9:32:23 PM PST by Republican Wildcat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: Aussie Dasher

THe only thing odd about this report is that it appears there was an "agreement".

Under the rules, the meeting would have been held on the 17th. At least one democrat would have to show up at the meeting, and all the republicans would have had to show up to ensure they could win the vote.

Then the democrat that showed up could ask for a 1-week delay. There was no choice but to provide that delay (except that Specter could rule the request out of order, and the republicans could support that ruling, but the media would then jump all over the republicans for breaking the rules).

Well, it appears that nobody wanted to end their 3-day holiday tuesday, so Specter agreed to simply NOT have the meeting. That means that the "next scheduled meeting" is now next tuesday. And at that meeting, the democrats COULD invoke the rule to delay a week. They haven't used the delay yet, because this "agreement" reschedules the meeting without them having to show up and invoke the rule.

The democrats have "promised" not to request a delay next tuesday, and I have to think they will live up to this promise -- although Specter was certain they made the same promise in November, which they are now breaking -- except that they haven't actually BROKEN the promise, since the agreement means none of them go on record asking for a delay, and no delay will be recorded --just a normal scheduled meeting being held on the 24th.

I wish Specter had made them show up and renege on their previous promise, just to be spiteful -- but we never would have known which senator requested the delay, and it would have been a useless act.

If the democrats ask for a delay next week, it will be simply them being the democrats they are, so I'm not holding my breath. Last year they promised Lugar that if they would accomodate some scheduling problems the democrats had, they would ensure a vote on without a delay -- and then when that day came, the requested the delay anyway, giving them time to convince Voinovich to switch sides.


58 posted on 01/16/2006 9:33:16 PM PST by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Natty Bumppo@frontier.net

Send him a pair of teflon nads


59 posted on 01/16/2006 9:33:29 PM PST by right-wingin_It
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Republican Wildcat

That is maddening. I was not aware of that.


60 posted on 01/16/2006 9:35:23 PM PST by rwfromkansas (http://www.xanga.com/rwfromkansas)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-105 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