Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: nopardons

OK. Speak now or forever hold your peace.

The wheel will turn someday, and I won't be able to bear the lunatics chosen by the Liberals.

I'm just not sure the reward is worth the future risk.


209 posted on 05/16/2005 9:07:59 PM PDT by Finalapproach29er (America is gradually becoming the Godless,out-of-control golden-calf scene,in "The Ten Commandments")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 172 | View Replies ]


To: Finalapproach29er
Look, in the entire history of the Senate, no party, NO PARTY AT ALL has ever used a quasi filibuster to quash judicial nominees. This tactic is something not only new, but reprehensible and future GOP Senators should NOT ever try to use it against the Dem president. There are other ways to derail presidential nominees; should the need arise. Look at how Abe Fortis's nomination was handled.
227 posted on 05/16/2005 9:19:42 PM PDT by nopardons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 209 | View Replies ]

To: Finalapproach29er
"The wheel will turn someday,"

That is absolutely correct. I see it happening about 40 years down the road. I think that the dims are so toast, that they may never recover- there may actually be a third party replacement, rather than a dim recovery. Kennedy- Kerry- Howard- CLINTOON? I don't see anything there in the near future.

248 posted on 05/16/2005 9:31:29 PM PDT by de Buillion (Jerusalem, 1099)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 209 | View Replies ]

To: Finalapproach29er

What makes you think that the DemoRats would not move to change the filibuster rule if the republicans in the future should attempt the kind of filibuster tactics that they have been engaging in. You might say, "Oh, they would not do that because it would be hypocritical". What a laugh. The demoRats are a party of hypocrisy. It was the liberal left of the demoRat Party together with republicans that changed the filibuster rules in the 60s so that it took only 60 votes to stop them instead of 67. They have absolutely no regard for the right of filibuster one way or another. It just depends on who is using the tactic at the time. I rather like the ability to filibuster but not for an unlimited period of time. It is anti-democratic to be able to overturn the will of the majority simply thru unlimited obstruction techniques. Of course, if the left would enshrine the ability to engage in unlimited senate debate in the constitution so that they could never change it when they so chose, I would have no objection. Forty one conservative senators could stop all leftist appointments in perpetuity. Not to worry, the left does not want that.


295 posted on 05/17/2005 10:51:26 AM PDT by brydic1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 209 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson