Posted on 05/10/2003 11:00:56 PM PDT by Angelwood
It was an increasingly damp day (from a few drops of rain escalating to just short of a downpour), but the DEMOCRAT OBSTRUCTION DAY Rally and Press Conference went forth as planned. Close to a hundred very serious, very determined individuals were gathered in the rain to put the spotlight on the unconstitutional filibusters and other tactics being used by the Minority Senate Democrats to block well-qualified judicial nominees from an up or down vote by the full Senate. May 9 was the second anniversary of President Bush's first judicial circuit court nominations.
Nine FReepers and lurkers were present at the rally: W04Man, ToleranceSucksRocks, holdonnow, kristinn, bmwcyle, Grand Old Partisan, Angelwood and several lurkers. The D.C. Chapter members brought the only signs and also passed out buttons and stickers. A man attending with his wife and two small children also brought a number of stickers to pass out to the crowd.
One sign had the cartoon called "Weapons of Mass Obstruction" with a number of missiles drawn with the names of Democrat Senators. Another sign had the recent cartoon with a torture chamber and a caption "Send in the next Bush nominee." JUDICIAL LITMUS TEST was the caption above the cartoon and DEMOCRAT-STYLE was the caption below. W04Man held this sign up next to his and both can be seen on the C-Span video. The last sign said, WHEN DEMOCRATS LOSE THEY CHANGE THE RULES - FREE MIGUEL ESTRADA.
The podium was set up on a large, concrete area under a canopy of trees. The TV cameras were set up opposite the podium. To the right of the podium was a grassy area and sidewalk that had more coverage from large trees and many people stood on that side during the event.
Mark R. Levin from Landmark Legal Foundation was the emcee of the event. His opening remarks stated that "Today is Obstruction Day, marking the second anniversary of the Senate Democrats using the unconstitutional filibuster to block highly-qualified presidential appointees from serving on the bench."
Mr. Levin then introduced the other speakers.
Senator John Cornyn (R-TX)
"As Mark said, today marks the two-year anniversary of President Bush's nomination of highly qualified candidates for the courts of appeals. Unfortunately, we are here to say that two years later we have a unprecedented filibuster of two of these highly qualified nominees and two years is too long.
"Now the Democrat leadership thinks that they can get away with blocking these well-qualified nominees, but we're here today to say that they are dead wrong. The message to the leaders of this filibuster is clear that the facts don't matter and please don't confuse us with the facts.
"These nominees are well qualified. They are mainstream legal scholars or judges and lawyers. They would be excellent members of the federal judiciary and they will be excellent judges.
"The obstructionists are spending too much time listening to the echo inside the Beltway and not enough time listening to the people who sent them here to represent them in the U.S. Senate. The obstructionists are hoping that over time we will grow tired and will just go away.
"They call these nominees extremists, partisans and much worse names. Where I come from we call these fighting words and we've only begun to fight. Thank you and God bless all of you."
Mark R. Levin, Landmark Legal Foundation
"Welcome to what's known around here as the Senate Swamp. Truer words have never been spoken on Capitol Hill. Unfortunately, we are here on Obstruction Day recognizing the second anniversary of the subversion of the United States Constitution by the Senate Democrats.
"The Framers made clear in the Constitution that there are only seven specific circumstances under which super majorities apply: Overriding a presidential veto, conviction in impeachment cases, expelling members of either house, Congress proposing amendments to the Constitution, state proposing a constitutional convention, a quorum in the House of Representatives for selecting a president, ratifying treaties. And if the heavens agree with me, let's start the rain.
"Nowhere in the Constitution, in the Federalist Papers or in any contemporary writings during the Constitutional Convention or the ratifying conventions can the Senate Democrats find support for their use of the filibuster to block judicial appointments. And Senate rules cannot be used to violate the Constitution. So, we have an extreme Democrat minority usurping the authority of the full Senate, usurping the appointment power of the president for the purpose of compromising the judiciary.
"Senator Charles Schumer, one of the more detestible leaders of this cabal, said the other day that he believed George Washington, James Madison and Thomas Jefferson would be proud of what he and his colleagues are doing today. Let me first inform Mr. Schumer, a self-annointed constitutional expert, that Jefferson didn't attend the Constitutional Convention. He was in Paris. Let me suggest further that Mr. Schumer's statement better describes his enormous ego than historical accuracy.
"This Constitution doesn't belong to Mr. Schumer or Ted Kennedy or Patrick Leahy and the cabal of democrats in the Senate or even the Senate itself. And it doesn't belong to these ironically named groups like People for the American Way, Alliance for Justice or the American Civil Liberties Union. The Constitution belongs to the American people and to future generations and that's why we are here -- to defend the Constitution."
C. Boyden Gray, Chairman, Committee for Justice
"[T]he filibuster as a device has never been used for more than 200 years until just the last two months to try to defeat a judicial nomination. If the Senate, in its wisdom, doesn't like any of the nominees, it can vote them down, vote them up or down, on an up or down vote. But the filibuster is totally new.
"Some years ago on the eve of Justice Forrester's withdrawal of his own nomination for Chief Justice, a letter was written to the Senate saying that a filibuster of judicial nominations would strike at the very heart of our constitutional system. That letter was signed by Deans of every major law school in America and all past presidents of the ABA.
"This is a brand new, unconstitutional device and it ought to be terminated right now. Thank you very much."
Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-TN)
"I have had the really distinct honor of being with the President of the United States today and he basically summarized directly to the American people, directly to those ofus in the United States Senate who were in the Rose Garden with him that the system is broken.
"It is unprecedented, and I say this as the Majority Leader of the United Stated Senate who for the last five onths has been exposed to maneuverings that have not ever taken place before on the floor of the Senate, breaking with the Senate traditions that we have had in the last 200 years. We are witnessing the unprecedented obstruction, unprecedented obstruction, of filibustering in a partisan way these judicial nominees. The President today, two years, two years ago, nominated eleven individuals, three of whom every United States Senator has not had the opportunity to vote up or down, yes or no.
"The President is not telling people out to vote. As Majority Leader, I don't want to tell people how to vote; but I do want to respect that basic tenet of the Constitution of advice and consent that gives every United States Senator that riaght, that ability to give advise and consent. And as long as you have the Democrats filibustering in this unprecedented way, our Senators are being denied -- the Senator from South Carolina, from Tennessee, from Texas, from California, from New York -- are being denied that opportunity to give that advice and consent. Why? Because they are being denied that opportunity to vote.
"Prior to that meeting I had the pleasure of going to the floor of the United States Senate and introducing legislation that addresses the fact that the Senate has changed, and it does change over the decades of time. The fact that we are seeing this partisan filibuster, it simply was not done 20 years ago or 40 years ago or 100 years ago or 150 years ago.
"In response, I would like to change the Senate Rules and I will do that with a proposal that was initially put forth by Joe Lieberman and Tom Harkin that had its second iteration with another Democrat, Zell Miller, but introduced today on behalf of myself and eleven other United States Senators, including Zell Miller and others. I hope to build strong support for that. And it guarantees adequate time for debate, but it means that once a nomination comes to the Floor of the United States Senate that a vote up or down will be allowed after thirteen days.
"And the details of that we can all review, but it really comes back to what the President said. And that is that the system is broken, that the system today is a disgrace and, I would add, it is unfair. It is unfair to United States Senators because they cannot give advice and consent if they are denied the opportunity to vote. It is unfair to the President of the United States and the balance of powers. The President puts forth those nominees for our advice and consent and it is unfair, as the President said today, to the American people.
"So, we will fight. We will not allow these filibusters to continue. It is a disservice to continue and we will fight it to the end. Thank you."
The rain was falling steadily and speakers kept their remarks short for the remainder of the press conference.
Grover Nordquist, President, Americans for Tax Reform
"The state legislatures of the following states have passed resolutions instructing their Senators to allow a vote immediately on Estrada: Iowa -- The Iowa Senate has told Mr. Harkin to have a vote now. When Tom Harkin votes to filibuster, he is not just expressing contempt for the process in the Senate but for the people in Iowa.
"The House in Louisiana has passed a resolution instructing the two Senators from Louisiana to hurry up and now vote on Estrada.
"The North and South Dakota Senate and House -- let me make it clear, four Democratic Senators leading this filibuster -- the House and the Senate in each of those states have called upon Mr. Daschle and the other three to hold a vote on Estrada now. When Mr. Daschle continues to filibuster, he is telling his own state to drop dead.
"And Washington state Senate has instructed the two Senators there to have a vote now on Estrada.
"This is not an inside the Beltway fight. The people around the country are focused on it and they are tired of the filibuster."
Robert DePosada, Chairman, Latino Coalition
"Clearly there is a judicial vacancy crisis and, when you look at it from a Hispanic perspective, it is even worse.
"Now all of a sudden they are applying an unprecedented double standard on qualified, and I mean very qualified, Hispanic judicial nominees. It is unprecedented that you are demanding papers from someone that you did not demand from judicial nominees before. It is unprecedented and a double standard that have you demanding qualifications that you did not demand from five out of the nine judges in the court two or three years ago.
"This kind of double standard is not going to be taken lightly in the next election. Hispanic voters are paying close attention to this process. And let me tell you, the fact that they chose a qualified Hispanic nominee to apply these double standards is not something we are going to take lightly in the coming election."
Victoria Toensing, Toensing & DeGenova, WISH
"I am a lawyer, a Republican and pro-choice. . . .I don't know whether Miguel Estrada or Priscilla Owen are pro-choice. I do know that they are good lawyers, both top rating by the ABA, and they will both follow the law. . . ."
Ms. Toensing told the group that she went to law school at the same time as Priscilla Owen and she knows the sting of perception, politics and discrimination from that era. She thought that era was over but it doesn't seem to be in the United States Senate, not with Senate Democrats.
"For if you look a certain way, if you are from a certain background, then you should believe a certain way and there is a higher standard. For example, Miguel Estrada has been asked more questions about the inner workings of the Justice Department. . .than any other candidate before him, a move opposed by a bipartisan group of previous Solicitor Generals.
"Priscilla Owen has never criticized Roe v. Wade and yet a white male who was confirmed last year did criticize Roe v. Wade.
"Miguel Estrada is not Hispanic enough. Priscilla Owen is not feminist enough. There is a diversity glass ceiling on the confirmation of judges. I say, let's get over it and let's get on with the vote."
Jay Sekulow, American Center for Law and Justice
"This Constitutional crisis that we are witnessing right now has effectively impacted all three branches of government. The President has been denied his constitutional authority to nominate and appoint well-qualified candidates and nominees for judicial office. The Senate has been denied its capability to vote on these nominees and give advice and consent. And the Judiciary in the end is the one that suffers which means that the American people suffer because we do not have these judicial vacancies filled.
"The irony of all of this is that the filibuster approach as now put forward is a complete violation of our constitutional framework. Nowhere in the Constitution of the United States does it say that . . . 40 Senators can stop the process. The idea that 40 Senators can stop the process of judicial nominees is outrageous and this is especially so when we know that there's a majority of Senators right now that, if a vote would take place in 15 minutes, would confirm Miguel Estrada and confirm Priscilla Owen. Despite the fact that the Constitution mandates this, there's obstruction.
"We say that this is the day of remembrance of Obstruction Day. There's nothing to celebrate here because in the end it is the Constitution that is suffering. And what I hope that we see today, with the President's comments, with the Majority Leader's comments, is that this game of impacting the Constitution this way, this game of rewriting the Constitution, this idea of stopping the effective work of all three branches of government has to stop. And the American people want it to stop and they want it to stop now. Thank you."
Manuel Miranda, Office of the Senate Majority Leader
"I've got to tell you it is an honor to work for Bill Frist and to have worked for Orin Hatch, fighting for Miguel Estrada; but I want to spend a second talking about Priscilla Owen.
"Priscilla Owen is a woman who graduated first in the Texas Bar, third in her law school at a time when few women went to law school, and then became a partner in her firm -- the first woman ever. She is a woman, the kind of person that the President has nominated. Not only a fine jurist, but then on Sundays teaches Sunday school, sings in the choir and raises money for seeing eye dogs. What is being done to her is an injustice and the American people when they understand the injustice being done to Miguel Estrada and Priscilla Owen, if it takes months, the final vote, the vote that will matter, will be in November 2004."
Mark R. Levin: "Hear that thunder? Somebody's mad and He's with us."
Phyllis Berry Myers, Executive Director, Center for New Black Leadership
"I'm not a lawyer. I'm not a constitutional scholar; but I've been involved in the battles for the confirmation of judges for a long time. I've just finished reading David McCullough's book on John Adams and I was wondering what he would think about all of this if he were here today. I think he would say that the system is broken and needs to be fixed.
"What I've read about him, I know that he wasn't a man who would be silent at a time like this. I think that he'd strenuously, vigorously and adamantly object to what's going on. I think he would say that the filibuster that is being conducted in the Senate now is a complete attempt to usurp the power of the President and put it in the Senate. I think he'd adamantly opoose that.
"The important thing is that the President has asked good men and good women, decent individuals, to come forth and serve our country. And John Adams, in a letter to his son, Thomas, wrote that 'Public business, my son, must be done by somebody. If wise men decline to do it, others will not. If honest men refuse to do it, others will not.'
"It is a wonder to me that reasonable, decent people such as Miguel Estrada and Priscilla Owen agree to go through the confirmation process at all. I wonder how many others from whose service our country could greatly benefit have just said 'No, not me. I'm not putting myself and my family through this.'
"And one other point, John Adams was a man of deep religious faith, integrity and had such strength of character that sometimes he took stances where he stood alone, all alone. And sometimes with only his wife and children to comfort and encourage him and sometimes he didn't even have them.
"The difference, I would say to Senator Hatch, Senator Frist and the others, is look around here. Today you're not alone. We are here with you. We stand here united and willing to fight with you in your battle to restore to the Senate a modicum of dignity and respect for its processes and procedures. So, I say to the Senators: Carry on. Be strong and steady. Hang tough. Do your Duty. Free the Bush judges. Free the Bush judges and confirm them now."
Craig Burkhardt, President, Republican National Lawyers Association
"The Founders of our nation assigned the power of judicial nomination to the President and the duty to advise and consent to the Senate. What the Constitution did not do is award a right of preemptive veto to a minority of Senators over judicial nominations.
"There is no consitutional guarantee to pursue filibusters and permanently preventing a Senate vote merely because a nominee is believed to be overly conservative or liberal breaks fundamentally the bond between Congress and the citizens of this country. End the permanent filibusters against the President's nominees now or change these Senate's Rules to prevent them in the future."
Todd Gaziano, Director, Legal/Judicial Center, Heritage Foundation
"I just want to spend a minute or two to dispell some of the excuses that the liberal Senators have been using to obstruct the process.
"We first heard with regard to Miguel Estrada that he wasn't Hispanic enough and then someone pointed out to them, I suppose, how racist that was, although that undertone is still heard by some.
"We then heard that he didn't have enough judicial experience. Well, that's even more insulting to the Hispanic lawyers and the extremely well qualified ones like Miguel Estrada who first need a seat on the bench before they can gain judicial experience.
"Then we heard he didn't answer their questions. But, when they offered to set up meetings between Miguel Estrada and any Senator so that they could conduct an indefinite personal hearing, they declined. And so now, they have resorted with respect to him, and they have had even less to make up with regard to Priscilla Owen, that they are somehow extreme, that they somehow will not bring the right balance.
"But I submit to you that it is the exact opposite reason why some of the extreme liberal Senators have opposed them. It is because they have refused to pledge to interpret the Constitution as the activists would like. They have only pledged fidelity to the Constitution. And that's what this fight is largely about. It would be a terrible fight if a majority of the Senate felt the way the obstructionists felt. But the plain fact of the matter is, is that a majority rejects that kind of interpretation of the Constitution, rejects that kind of litmus test. A majority of the Senate would approve those two nominees and every one of President Bush's nominees.
"So, that what we've got to continue to fight for is that the minority who is trying to use the permanent filibuster to oppose these people and to upset the constitutional order, to upset the independence of the Judiciary needs to be stopped. Thank you."
Lori Waters, Executive Director, Eagle Forum
"Democrats and their feminist friends like to claim they are for equal rights for women -- just not for Priscilla Owen. They believe that the Constitution is a living and breathing document. So next to advise and consent they have added a glass ceiling to keep this qualified nominee, Priscilla Owen, off the court of appeals.
"Democrats like to claim they're for open borders to welcome immigrants to our lands. Yet, they won't open the court to a qualified nominee.
"It's been two years. This is Obstruction Day. When are Democrats going to free these nominees? And it's time for Independence Day."
Wendy Wright, Senior Policy Director, Concerned Women for America
"Senate Democrats are standing in the doorway of the Senate voting booth forbidding the majority of Senators from voting. Perhaps it's time to send an election monitoring team to investigate this abuse.
"This filibuster is grounded in disdain for Americans, citizens who put in office the Senators that Democratic Senators are blocking from voting. A minority of Senators, by filibustering, is attempting to throw out the results of the last Senate election and replace majority rule with minority rule.
"Webster's Dictionary states that filibuster is also known as "freebooter," which means a lawless military adventure, especially one in quest of plunder. The plunder in this case includes a woman, Priscilla Owen.
"Justice Owen has proven her outstanding judicial ability and ethics. But, in their effort to exercise raw power, Democratic Senators have changed the bar. No longer do women have to just work harder to be equal. No, Senate Democrats don't want excellence. They require adherence to leftist, out-of-the-mainstream politics.
"By filibustering Miguel Estrada and Priscilla Owen, Senate Democrats reveal that they don't desire judges with integrity who will uphold the vision of the American Founding Fathers. They want judges whose guiding light is Senator Schumer, who recently rejected the constitutional method for appointing judges to replace with his own plan that would put the selection of our judges in the hands of unelected, unaccountable cronies. Senate Democrats are requiring that federal judges be biased, to reject the Constitution in favor of opinions of an elite minority ruling class.
"Politics should end at the courthouse door. When a woman enters a federal courtroom, she needs to know that she will be on equal footing, not subject to the political views of the judge. It is time for Senators to prove they believe in the concept of equality by ending the unjust filibuster and voting for judges with integrity and a commitment to the Constitution."
Mark R. Levin Closing Remarks
"Well, this is the Senate Swamp. It is time to leave. We appreciate your attendance. We are going to double our efforts. We are going to ensure that the Constitution is upheld and these groups, and 25 times these groups, are going to work as hard as possible to make sure that the Judiciary remains independent, that the Legislature knows what its job is and that the Presidential powers that are being threatened here remain in force. Thank you very much."
_______________
We stayed the course, but we were glad to get out of the rain!
Angelwood, many thanks forthe post and no , it wasn't " too long " at all. :-)
Bump!
bttt for a later read . . .
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.