[SouthCarolinaKit]

They'd never get away with this lie without the MSM! Someone better than I should look up what those slimes were saying when 'RATs were in the majority and filllibusters could have been used by the GOP. I'd bet they were all against it then!

[rodguy911]

Absolutely right! It's the same old time tested standby trick used by the rats so successfully. Create a lie and get the old media to spread it. It works 75% of the time. And by the time they are discovered they are on to the next lie. Almost clintonesque.

[deport]

A few comments on the record from the Democrats who now support filibusters of judicial nominees.....

• Senator Leahy (past Judiciary Chairman and current Ranking Member): "If we want to vote against somebody, vote against them. I respect that. State your reasons. I respect that. But don't hold up a qualified judicial nominee. . . . I have stated over and over again on this floor that I would . . . object and fight against any filibuster on a judge, whether it is somebody I opposed or supported; that I felt the Senate should do its duty." (Congressional Record, June 18, 1998.)

• Senator Leahy: "I have said on the floor, although we are different parties, I have agreed with Gov. George Bush, who has said that in the Senate a nominee ought to get a [floor] vote, up or down, within 60 days." (Congressional Record, October 11, 2000.)

• Senator Daschle (Minority Leader): "As Chief Justice Rehnquist has recognized: 'The Senate is surely under no obligation to confirm any particular nominee, but after the necessary time for inquiry it should vote him up or vote him down.' An up-or-down vote, that is all we ask for [Clinton judicial nominees] Berzon and Paez." (Congressional Record, October 5, 1999.)

• Senator Biden (past Judiciary Chairman): "But I also respectfully suggest that everyone who is nominated ought 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. . . . 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 . . . ." (Congressional Record, March 19, 1997.)

• Senator Kennedy (past Judiciary Chairman): "The Chief Justice of the United States Supreme Court said: 'The Senate is surely under no obligation to confirm any particular nominee, but after the necessary time for inquiry it should vote him up or vote him down.' Which is exactly what I would like." (Congressional Record, March 7, 2000.)

• Senator Kennedy: "We owe it to Americans across the country to give these nominees a vote. If our Republican colleagues don't like them, vote against them. But give them a vote." (Congressional Record, February 3, 1998.)

• Senator Feinstein (Judiciary Committee member): "A nominee is entitled to a vote. Vote them up; vote them down." (Congressional Record, September 16, 1999.)

• "I have stated over and over again on this floor that I would . . . object and fight against any filibuster on a judge, whether it is somebody I opposed or supported . . ." (-- Senator Leahy, Congressional Record, June 18, 1998)

• "I do not want to get [to] having to invoke cloture on judicial nominations. I think it is a bad precedent." (-- Senator Leahy, Congressional Record, September 16, 1999)

CLICK