Posted on 01/29/2006 2:27:33 PM PST by Pukin Dog
I’ve spent no time on Free Republic today, because I’ve been monitoring my favorite nut-job sites to see whether or not they were actually going to go ahead with their incredibly stupid plans to attempt a filibuster against the Senate Confirmation of Judge Alito.
I’m telling you folks, if you ever wanted to see Liberal madness in action, just pop on over to one of these Democrat web sites. But I warn you, please do so before eating if you don’t want to risk tossing your cookies.
What you will join me in witnessing, is the inward implosion of the Left, brought to you by the Flipper-in-Chief, John Kerry. Never has one man’s ego done so much for his enemies, as what John Kerry does for us this week. Thanks to Kerry, every one if his potential fellow contenders for the Presidential nomination in 2008 are being forced to follow him over the same cliff and support this doomed effort, just to maintain their standing with the wacko-left.
What this tells me, is that Congressional Democrats are so bereft of ideas, while at the same time so hard-up for campaign dollars, that they can be led around by the nose by the likes of those who fill the pages at Daily Kos and other wacko-left hangouts. This weekend, the wacko left said “JUMP”, and Senate Democrats said “How High, baby?”
The calls (threats) have gone out wide and far, first it was Di-Fi, who claimed she would not support a filibuster. But when the wacko’s got her fax number and reminded her that her special brand of “well formed arguments” would no longer be funded if she did not flip. She flipped so hard, I hear she is still dizzy from the G forces.
After now, serious discussion with ‘Old Crusty’, it appears that Senator Clinton saw the light, and will also be joining the filibuster fray. This has now opened the gates for the rest of the lemmings, ready to fly over that cliff to the rocks below. Feingold, Biden, and Obama too. All ready to make that leap into Senatorial oblivion, just so the rabid left wont say mean things about them, or worse yet, through their support (dollars) to Howard Dean, Wesley Clark, or the formally-sane Albert Gore.
Imagine the beating these brave Senators would receive from The Screamer or the Perfumed Prince during the primary season about their failure to fight hard enough against Alito. Oh, the rapture! After Alito is confirmed to the bench, there will be nothing left but the sound and fury against Senators who failed, and even more anger against Senators who stood back and let Alito gain the bench.
And now, sensing this massive calamity that the wacko-left has forced upon the Democrats, the DLC (you know, that group that managed to get the only Democrat President elected in the last 25 years) has come out against the filibuster. The only group of Democrats that understands that crazy people don’t win elections no matter how much support they get, has decided that this filibuster will only hurt the Democrats and their chances in November.
Here is a snipped of their article:
But we stress this last point: in the Senate debate on this confirmation, Democrats should focus on Alito's judicial philosophy, and discard the personal attacks that figure so prominently in some of the interest-group campaigning against his confirmation. Such attacks at best distract from the principled case against Alito; at worst, they undermine it.
For the same reason and others, we do not think Senate Democrats should try to filibuster this confirmation. A filibuster is certain to fail; indeed, the Senate is certain to respond to a filibuster by outlawing them permanently in judicial confirmations. Using this weapon now would stake Democrats to the implausible argument that Alito's inevitable confirmation is the most egregious act of the Bush administration and the Republican Senate, going into a critical midterm election.
Gee, it would seem that some Democrats want to take a ‘principled stand, win or lose. You can only imagine the grief they are receiving today from the wacko-left factions who have not won an important election on their own, (that is by campaigning as Liberals) since………………Sorry, I’m not old enough to remember! I thought of the Liberal McGovern, who campaigned as a liberal, he got smashed. So Jimmuh Carter ran as a southern moderate, and apparently had enough discipline to hold that lie until gaining the White House, whereupon Roselyn must have found the happy pills and took them herself, leaving Jimmuh nothing on which to appear decisive accept the Olympics.
It appears that the Democrats have not learned their lesson, which is why I am still predicting that we will pick up seats in both the House and Senate. John Kerry is indeed the gift that keeps on giving. Here’s hoping that he, Gore, Dean and maybe Chuck Hagel, (who is rumored to be about to vote against Alito for the attention it will get him) can all get together for a whistle-stop tour through the United States, just like those Circus freak shows of old.
So, if you are a Broncos fan, steel…. Oops I mean STILL feeling down over last week, cheer up and visit a few Democrat sites today, and watch as the war goes down. They are tearing each other apart! They are so angry with each other, they haven’t even noticed yet how Howard Dean blew up Harry Reid today on Fox.
Abramoff THIS, you idiot liberals!
Oh how I love the smell of burning Liberals in the morning. If you agree, be tuned in for the big explosion tomorrow, when Alito ruins their whole day. Even the most profound of idiots might decide to take stock, and try to figure out why someone that they think is so dumb, so incompetent as our President, can manage to kick their liberal asses up and down the block any time he wants too.
Oh, I know, it’s because he is spying on them! Right?
I heard Tuesday also. They even mentioned that Alito would be sworn in and with the other justices in time of the SOTU Address.
Mo' tea?
Thanks. I should have known you'd have ALL the details. :-)
bttt
I would love to see Young Jack Roberts in the gallery too but I fear he might try to climb down it.
Although a dem state, Louisiana is far more conservative than Mass. It would have cost him here. No doubt it would be helpful in Mass.
I like your handle. Sounds like an old radio vacuum tube number.
That would be sweet. Like rubbing the rats noses in dog poo.
George Allen was asked why he thought that Kerry and others were talking filibuster...and he said the same as you "fundraising"...
Soros and Moveon.org...stated after the election in 2004...that they OWN the dem party...because of all of the $$$$$$ that was put in their coffers...
and that the agenda would be set by them...and from what I have seen, that has played out...
I think at this point...it is a win-win situation for President Bush either way.
The dems will have pooped in their oatmeal again..
Maybe, but such a nominee would not only be antithetical to what I (and most conservatives) believe on individual issues, but more importantly than that would disagree fundamentally on the purpose of the law. I believe the purpose of the law is to defend Constitutional liberties and secure the Republic. Leftists like Justice Ginsburg would probably agree with the above, but would add that they see the law as a tool to enact nonviolent social revolution, and overthrow the existing moral and cultural order.
So I disagree with that fundamentally, just as the left disagrees with Alito's originalism because it is not likely to read into the Constitution the most cherished aspects of their social revolution.
Though I too get angry that the left has thoroughly politicized the nomination process, the fact is that they are just being consistent with their stated beliefs. Their is really nothing hypocritical about it. I disagree with their fundamental worldview more than I do their tactics.
I sure hope they are - what a great statement about the old RAT party. Maybe we can have a split of RATs even before the '06 midterms - ya think?
Does anyone know if King George is still pushing for banning all firearms in America and for the legalization of hard drugs? He is quite a guy and the RATs are so beholden to this American HATER. Send him back to Hungary or wherever hole he crawled out of.
I would prefer a Sheehan/Kerry ticket. Clearly we all know that Kerry can't win, give Mother Sheehan a chance! I would like to see her as CIC, wouldn't you?
Let's see if Moon-bat Sheehan can take out Fineswine first.
I love that they want to mount a failed filibuster...they won't get the votes and will piss so many people off in the process. My ueber-lefty mother is speechless over their stupidity, I loved informing her that Kerry had been coordinating this from Switzerland.
After cloture is invoked up to thirty hours of debate is allowed under the Senate Rules. That means that the Democrats could filibuster up to 30 hours after a successful cloture vote. If they sucessfuly are able to do this it would deny the Pres. an opportunity to appear at the SOTU with Alito as a Supreme Court Justice. Have the democrats waived their right to 30 hours of debate after cloture is invoked or are they going to take the 30 hours of debate and delay the Tuesday vote until later in the week?
There is a Unanimous Consent agreement that overrides the normal intervals prescribed in the Senate Rules.
You noted the discrepancy in the 30 hours of debate, post cloture, but there is also a discrepancy in the timing of taking the cloture vote itself. The rule says,
... and one hour after the Senate meets on the following calendar day but one, he shall lay the motion before the Senate and direct that the clerk call the roll, and upon the ascertainment that a quorum is present, the Presiding Officer shall, without debate, submit to the Senate by a yea-and-nay vote the question:The Senate is now in adjournment, until 10:00 am Monday (today), so if the cloture vote was taken at the time prescribed by the rules, it would be at 11:00 am."Is it the sense of the Senate that the debate shall be brought to a close?" ...
Not only that, but after the cloture motion was filed on Thursday, Senator Frist allowed that debate may have been conducted on Saturday and Sunday, should any Senators desire.
We are now scheduled to have a vote on January 31. That is the agreement the Democrat leader and I agreed to in representing our caucuses earlier today. That means we will have had a total of 5 days of floor activity. It is 8 o'clock tonight. We have had speech and debate over the course of the day, and we will have debate tomorrow. As everyone is well aware, we are given plenty of time in the Senate. We could stay here later tonight, tomorrow, tomorrow night. I said we will plow through Saturday until we get this done. It will end up being 5 days in terms of floor action.If there had been a Saturday session, and Rule XXII was followed without having been modified by the unanimous consent agreement, the cloture vote could have happened on Saturday morning.
Anyway, that summary of what "could have - would have" is overridden by a Unanimous Consent agreement.
That contents at that link will change at some point, as the link is to the daily version of the Senate's Executive Calendar.UNANIMOUS CONSENT AGREEMENTS
(SAMUEL A. ALITO, JR. [Cal. No. 490])
Ordered, that at 10 a.m. on Monday, January 30, 2006 , the Senate proceed to executive session and resume consideration of the nomination of Samuel A. Alito, Jr., of New Jersey, to be an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States.
Ordered further, That the time from 10 to 11 a.m. be under the control of the Democratic Leader or his designee; the time from 11 a.m. to noon be under the control of the Majority Leader or his designee, with the time alternating in the same manner for the rest of the day.
Ordered further, That at 4 p.m. the Democratic Leader or his designee be recognized for up to 15 minutes, and that the final 15 minutes before the cloture vote be under the control of the Majority Leader or his designee.
Ordered further, That at 4:30 p.m. on Monday, January 30, 2006, the cloture vote occur on the nomination of Samuel A. Alito, Jr.; provided further, that the mandatory quorum under Rule XXII be waived. Ordered further, That if cloture is invoked, notwithstanding the provisions of Rule XXII, the Senate proceed to a vote on the confirmation of the nomination at 11 a.m. on Tuesday, January 31, 2006; provided further, that all debate time on Tuesday prior to 11 a.m. be equally divided between the Majority Leader and Democratic Leader or their designees, and that the cloture vote may be vitiated with agreement of the two Leaders.
(January 26 and 27, 2006.)
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/executive_calendar/xcalv.pdf
The vote on the nomination is fixed at 4:30 PM Tuesday, contingent on either passage or vitiation of the pending cloture motion.
The vote on the nomination is fixed at 4:30 PM11:00 AM Tuesday, contingent on either passage or vitiation of the pending cloture motion.
Thanks for the information. Sounds like the nomination is going to barely squeak by before the State of the Union Address. Tuesday is looking to be a big day.
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.