LIVE THREAD: SENATE FILIBUSTER!! Call Capitol Swtchbrd 1-800-648-3516 to Protest Dem Obstructionism

www.freerepublic.com | November 12, 2003

[Howlin]

FILIBUSTER BEGINS AT 6:00 P.M. EST!!!!

[hoosiermama]

yes 48
No 52

[Freemeorkillme]

Important to FReep the right polls???

http://frist.senate.gov/

[Capitalism2003]

don't worry about the online poll...Every voice message the demo senators received is LOGGED and they are told how many called in opposition/support of their actions. They assume that for every call they get, at least 50 people did NOT call. This is why Freeping is so effective. If every Freeper will just take ten minutes tonight and phone 5-6 lefty Senators, we can turn the tide against them, and force them to fold on the filibuster. 1-800-648-3516

[Michael Barnes]

Saw that above..think I might have to permanently borrow that from ya...

;)

[Maigrey]

So, a hot coals Republican is the same as a Broken Glass Republican?

[onyx]

You have every reason to be proud of Rick. I adore him too, albeit, from afar.

[deport]

Senate rules can be amended by simple majority, but takes a 2/3rds vote of the Senator present and voting to bring cloture if it is filibustered.... But once cloture is obtained a simple majority is sufficient to change, amend or adopt a rule.

[Laverne]

The 800 number is posted on the intro to this thread, call that, ask to be connected to the cloak-room

[Mo1]

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1019988/posts?page=157#157

SETTING THE RECORD STRAIGHT ON JUDICIAL NOMINATIONS (Senate - March 19, 1997)

[Page: S2540] GPO's PDF

Mr. BIDEN

..................Let it suffice to say at the moment, at least for me, that it is totally appropriate for any U.S. Senator to voice his or her opposition to any nominee for the Court, and they have a full right to do that. In my study of and teaching of constitutional law and separation of powers issues, there is nothing in the Constitution that sets the standard any Senator has to apply, whether they vote for or against a judge.

But I also respectfully suggest that everyone who is nominated is entitled to have a shot, to have a hearing and to have a shot to be heard on the floor and have a vote on the floor.

We had a tie vote in the committee, Madam President, on one of the Supreme Court nominees. I was urged by those who opposed him--and I opposed this particular nominee--to not report it to the floor. My reading of the Constitution, though, is the Judiciary Committee is not mentioned in the Constitution. The Judiciary Committee is not mentioned. The Senate is. We only in the Judiciary Committee have the right to give advice to the Senate, but it is the Senate that gives its advice and consent on judicial nominations.

I sincerely hope, and I have urged the administration to confer with Republican Senators before they nominate anyone from that Senator's State. I think that is totally appropriate. I think it is appropriate, as well, that Republican Senators, with a Democratic President, have some input, which Democrats never had with the last two Republican Presidents. I think that is appropriate.

But I do not think it is appropriate, if this is the case--and I do not know for certain, it just appears to be--if the real hangup here is wanting to reach an informal agreement that for every one person the President of the United States gets to nominate, the Republican Party will get to nominate someone, the Republican Party in the Senate. Or for every two persons that the President nominates, the Republicans get to nominate one.

It is totally appropriate for Republicans to reject every single nominee if they want to. That is within their right. But it is not,I will respectfully request, Madam President, appropriate not to have hearings on them, not to bring them to the floor and not to allow a vote , and it is not appropriate to insist that we, the Senators--we, the Senators--get to tell the President who he must nominate if it is not in line with the last 200 years of tradition.

Again, I did not intend speaking at all on this, other than the fact I walked through and it was brought up, and since I was in that other capacity for so long, I felt obliged to speak up.


158 posted on 11/12/2003 11:52 AM EST by OXENinFLA (Lack Of Orders Is No Excuse For Inaction ------ Patton

[CWW]

You bet. Santorum will be a stateman (if he's not already)!

[Libertina]

Is this going to continue until WE get our way? Otherwise, why is it being done?

[rwfromkansas]

DUers must be working in tandem with multiple other organizations.......the Frist poll has changed dramatically in literally minutes.

We are going way behind now.

[Oldeconomybuyer]

Clear your cookies and cache, and hit the poll again ...

[hoosiermama]

takes a 2/3rds vote of the Senator present and voting
THOSE rats better not go too far.....

[BCrago66]

Just go the live stream in Cspan.org.

[Freemeorkillme]

WE ARE GETTING KILLED RIGHT NOW 46-54!

VOTE!

http://frist.senate.gov/

and then vote again after clearing cookies and so on.

[StriperSniper]

C-SPAN

[Chad Fairbanks]

Somebody posted a list of quotes on here.......forgot who

I think that was Diotima...

[onyx]

Toll free 1-800-648-3516

[Oldeconomybuyer]

 Yes:
 

47%

 No:
 

54%

 
22772 total votes
 

We're losing!