'Splainin' the GOP Estrada Strategery (as I understand it writes Rush Limbaugh)

rushlimbaugh ^ | 3/3/2003 | rushlimbaugh

[TLBSHOW]

Have at it folks this is the GOP way to win as explained by Rush as best he understands it. ......

We'll just have to wait and see if this is how it plays out, but this is the GOP Senate strategery, as I understand it.

Rush Limbaugh

[NeoCaveman]

I've been under the impression that if the Republicans call for a vote and lose it, it's over and Estrada is defeated. But that's not the case.

I respect Rush more than ever, because he was able to admit that he did not understand the strategery. That takes a big man to do.

[spokeshave]

works for me

[I still care]

From what I understand, the Hispanics in Louisiana are furious with Landrieu. She promised she wouldn't vote against Estrada in her campaign (she claims she never promised that but that was the public perception). Now she is stabbing them in the back, in the belief that in 6 years they will have forgotten all about her duplicity.

[Grand Old Partisan]

Rush and the rest of America may soon be learning of at least two new approaches to secure confirmation for Miguel Estrada! Here's one a hint for one: William D. Crum

[MonroeDNA]

Rush is right, but some of us called this more than a week ago.

[TLBSHOW]

I think he is only repeating what the GOP strategery was as best he understands it. Did you read this?

Unconstitutional filibuster

WASHINGTON--The president, preoccupied with regime change elsewhere, will occupy a substantially diminished presidency unless he defeats the current attempt to alter the constitutional regime here. If at least 41 Senate Democrats succeed in blocking a vote on the confirmation of Miguel Estrada to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, the Constitution effectively will be amended.

If Senate rules, exploited by an anticonstitutional minority, are allowed to trump the Constitution's text and two centuries of practice, the Senate's power to consent to judicial nominations will have become a Senate right to require a 60-vote supermajority for confirmations. By thus nullifying the president's power to shape the judiciary, the Democratic Party will wield a presidential power without having won a presidential election.

George Will

http://www.townhall.com/columnists/georgewill/gw20030227.shtml

[TLBSHOW]

I hope it works.

[MonroeDNA]

Dittoes to ya!

Didn't you also say that there is an arcane rule where the Preisident of the Senate (Cheney) can call for an immediate vote?

Or was that another respected Freeper?

[NeoCaveman]

I read the George Will article last week.

[Grand Old Partisan]

Guilty as charged!

[TLBSHOW]

From what I understand, the Hispanics in Louisiana are furious with Landrieu. She promised she wouldn't vote against Estrada in her campaign (she claims she never promised that but that was the public perception). Now she is stabbing them in the back, in the belief that in 6 years they will have forgotten all about her duplicity.

.....

Look at this from a Rush Story February 12, 2003

.....

Estrada Betrayed By Landrieu; Bashed By Schumer & Menendez; Frist & GOP Fight for Historic Hispanic Nominee


On Wednesday, I broke down the truth behind this Senate confirmation battle over President Bush's nominee for the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals: Miguel Estrada. You can hear me touch on all the points of this hot issue - from Mary Landrieu's flip-flop to Democratic "weapons of mass obstruction" - in the audio links below.

Judgeships matter, folks, so listen up.

Liberals want activists on the bench who will write instead of just interpret law, because that's the only way they can advance their unpopular agenda. Mr. Estrada will be a good judge; the Democrats are opposing him because he doesn't match their litmus test for judicial activism. They always complain that Republicans have these tests, but they think they're just fine on their side. They don't want a man like this on the bench - where he'll be, it's said, on the fast track to the Supreme Court.

This will be a big test for Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-TN), because the Democrats are threatening a filibuster. Frist made a good start by calling the Democrats' bluff. Usually the mere threat of a filibuster is enough to derail a vote. But Frist is challenging the Democrats to go out on the Senate floor, in full view of the C-Span2 cameras, and use this trick to prevent the first Hispanic from sitting on this court.

There aren't enough Democrats willing to do that, and Frist needs 60 votes to break the filibuster. With my audio comments on Mr. Estrada, you'll hear some funny bites of Judiciary Committee Chairman Senator Orrin Hatch (R-UT) hammering away at Senator Harry Reid (D-NV). Reid either wasn't paying attention, or pulled the tactic of deliberately misunderstanding when Republicans said that these rabid leftists are deploying "weapons of mass obstruction" on Estrada. The truth really gets to these guys when the GOP has the grapes to point it out.
http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_021203/content/truth_detector.member.html

[Cboldt]

arcane rule where the Preisident of the Senate (Cheney) can call for an immediate vote?

My understanding of the arcane rule, and the example used by the author of the book, was the VP ordering a matter out of committee, and onto the Senate floor. As the Estrada nomination is already on the Senate floor, this tactic is not relevant.

[Cboldt]

arcane rule where the Preisident of the Senate (Cheney) can call for an immediate vote?

One other point . . . any Senator can "call for the vote" on Estrada. That has happened several times over the course of the past few weeks. Each time there was a call for a vote, one DEM objected, so debate was continued.

[Grand Old Partisan]

It's not at all so cut-and-dried as that....

[MonroeDNA]

If you don't mind, and if you would be so kind, could you possibly explain the procedure again?

I really like it!

[Grand Old Partisan]

It's in the hands of the specialists now.

[MonroeDNA]

Hey, thanks for the clarification. I am rather ignorant on Senate procedures and rules.

Freegards,

[MonroeDNA]

May I ask, what is your opinion on the most likely outcome?

[Cboldt]

I am no expert on Senate rules either, but am learning.

Cloture is the means where 60 members of the Senate decice that one matter will be the SOLE object of discussion, until it is voted up or down. If 60 Senators can't agree on clouture, the matter remains one of (several) matters that the Senate can debate.

One Senator can object to a vote being taken, and thereby keep a matter from coming to a vote, that is, unless 60 Senators over-ride.

Cloture votes have to be "announced" nominally 48 hours before they are taken, by filing a motion for a cloture vote.

Generally, Senate rules give lots of power to each individual Senator, and the process is designed to regulate the amount of debate.