Posted on 05/12/2005 10:45:25 AM PDT by Pikamax
KEN STARR'S REAL VIEWS [Ramesh Ponnuru]
CBS, AP, and other outlets reported earlier this week that Starr had said that getting rid of the judicial filibuster would be a "radical, radical departure from our history and our traditions, and it amounts to an assault on the judicial branch of government."
This seemed like a very odd thing for Starr to say, so I contacted him.
He forwarded to me an email he had sent to someone else who had asked about this matter:
"In the piece that I have now seen, and which I gather is being lavishly quoted, CBS employed two snippets. The 'radical departure' snippet was specifically addressed -- although this is not evidenced whatever from the clip -- to the practice of invoking judicial philosopy as a grounds for voting against a qualified nominee of integrity and experience. I said in sharp language that that practice was wrong. I contrasted the current practice . . . with what occurred during Ruth Ginsburg's nomination process, as numerous Republicans voted (rightly) to confirm a former ACLU staff lawyer. They disagreed with her positions as a lawyer, but they voted (again, rightly) to confirm her. Why? Because elections, like ideas, have consequences. . . . In the interview, I did indeed suggest, and have suggested elsewhere, that caution and prudence be exercised (Burkean that I am) in shifting/modifying rules (that's the second snippet), but I likewise made clear that the 'filibuster' represents an entirely new use (and misuse) of a venerable tradition. . . .
"[O]ur friends are way off base in assuming that the CBS snippets, as used, represent (a) my views, or (b) what I in fact said."
Seems to me CBS needs to receive a bunch of e-mails and phone calls...questioning their veracity, etc.
I urge him to do so. CBS crossed a line last year, and this proves nothing was learned. It's time everyone over there started receiving summons. Instead of an investigation into baseball, THIS is what the Senators should investigate.
has a nice ring to it.
I may ship cBS a shovel,so they can just keep digging a deeper hole.
Sort of off topic, but why would anyone want to get rid of the filibuster? That just means when the Dems are in charge of juducial nominees, we can't filibuster either.
***Until the MSM run Starr's correction on page 1, CBS (unfortunately) HAS gotten away with it!***
The way I see this is that MOST people in this country never knew or don't care who Ken Starr is. BUT CBS just blew it! Everyone will now know that Starr has accused CBS of quoting him out of context. CBS has dirtied its own name, and people will lose more faith in it. Way to go, CBS, keep it up.
We never have fillibustered judges. And until now, neither had the dems.
I don't support the so called nuclear option of eliminating the ability to filibuster judicial nominees. I do however support getting rid of the "Gentlemans Fillibuster" which is what is being used now.
If they want to fillibuster, fine. Do a REAL FILLIBUSTER!
"Rush is talking about this right now. The actions of CBS in this case don't quite rise to the dishonesty of Rathergate, but they're damn close."
No I think the dishonest itself is certainly just as great. I am sure they knew exactly what they were doing.
I'll grant that the CONSEQUENCES may not be as great; that may be open to debate.
If the judicial filibuster isn't provided by the Constitution, then get rid of it.
We never have? Are you sure? Not even under Clinton?
Never. Not once. Not a single time. Ever.
Also forcefully remind them that, beginning today, we are calling for a complete Boycott of ALL cBS programming and will inform cBS' local and national advertisers of that fact!
"If the judicial filibuster isn't provided by the Constitution, then get rid of it."
Check the constitution. In the same paragraph that grants the Senate the authority to approve treaties with a 2/3 vote it says they shall also advise and consent to judicial nominnees but says nothing ao a super majority requirement.
CBS has now officially become a Disinformation Bureau.
Thanks for the ping. I had just heard it on Rush and was glad to find this thread.
I have heard the contrary, that we "did" sort of do it, and then they name some judges, although apparently the filibusters were of short duration and of no consequence, or SOMETHING like that. Then I have heard from liberal sources that Republicans HAVE done the same thing. I'd like to get to the bottom of that one..
Exposed again eh? Good.
I wonder.....can Ken Starr SUE SeeBS for deliberately lying about what he said? If not....maybe in the future, interviewees of SeeBS should insist upon having their OWN camera taping the interview, as well.
At any rate....SeeBS needs to go. This is the last straw....I've had it with them.
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.