To: neverdem
If Republicans fulfill their threat to overturn the historic role of the filibuster...
Someone should inform the NYT that THERE IS NO HISTORIC ROLE OF THE FILIBUSTER IN JUDICIAL APPOINTMENTS!!! The use of the filibuster in judicial appointments is a new low in the democrats' arsenal of anti-democratic methods of achieving what they couldn't do at the ballot box. As usual, the NYT conventiently leaves this fact out. They are nothing but a bunch of low class liars.
To: AaronInCarolina
Someone should inform the NYT that THERE IS NO HISTORIC ROLE OF THE FILIBUSTER IN JUDICIAL APPOINTMENTS!!! And what the Republicans simply want is for these judicial nominees to get out of committee, where they can get a vote. The NYT seems to forget that we can't get a 51 majority vote unless that happens first OR the pubbies invoke the nuclear option.
46 posted on
03/05/2005 7:30:58 PM PST by
ThirstyMan
(Why is it, all the dead vote for Democrats?)
To: AaronInCarolina
120 posted on
03/06/2005 12:18:22 AM PST by
CyberAnt
(Pres. Bush: "Self-government relies, in the end, on the governing of the self.")
To: AaronInCarolina
The NYT puts this kind of stuff out because they know the SHEEPLE will believe their propaganda .
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson