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

To: rabscuttle385
Maybe that's what McLame was saying when he answered my mail on my view of the filibustering of judicial nominees in 2005.

"Recently, I and thirteen of my colleagues, seven Democrats and seven Republicans, agreed to support an up or down vote on three of the president's judicial nominees who had previously been filibustered, and to resort to the filibuster only in the most extraordinary circumstances.

As of this writing, our agreement has paved the way for a successful confirmation on six nominees.....

6th para: Someday, I hope none too soon, Republicans will again be in the minority and a Democrat will be elected President.

I am not prepared to surrender a minority right to restrain future Democratic Senate majority and future Democratic presidents.

Nor do I think it wise to change Senate rule by breaking a Senate rule and perhaps encouraging a future Democratic majority from doing the same thing in debates on judicial nominees, other ex....

Well, you get the message in bold. Was he hoping Hillary might win? Also, I don't think the Democrats will be above breaking any rule? They just "change" the rules.

18 posted on 12/24/2008 8:24:49 PM PST by TribalPrincess2U (Welcome to Obama's America... Be afraid, be very afraid)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: TribalPrincess2U
Here's hoping John McLame enjoys every minute of the next two years. He needs to be defeated in 2010. McLame is a disgrace to his constituents and our Constitution.
20 posted on 12/25/2008 12:58:58 PM PST by AmericanGirlRising (Saving plastic bags and buying carbon credits will not get me into Heaven.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies ]

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