Posted on 05/23/2005 4:18:39 PM PDT by jern
I loved your put-down of econ-grad in post 971. I think everyone needs to cool off a bit and see how this all plays out now. My biggest take is that three of the "MOST EXTREME CONSERVATIVE JUDGES" are going to be confirmed right away. That's going to be very hard for the Demodog base to recover from...
I agree. And it will look like breaking the agreement. "I thought the agreement meant no more filibusters!"
The Republicans will not stop them.
I think the next go around will look alot like this one. Outcome uncertain.
Clearly you are very confused.
I'll use simpler words. If they don't filibuster judicial nominees, we won't change the rules to make such filibusters illegal. Those are the two parts of the deal.
It goes without saying that if they filibuster judicial nominees in the future then the agreement is null and void.
You don't understand. Frist pulls the trigger.
Take a look at this blog and then see if you are still optimistic.. They said it better than anyone on this thread:
http://www.powerlineblog.com/
And what exactly have these RINOs gotten you? Nothing. On the votes that count, you can NEVER count on them. And if you think Republicans really control the Senate, you're just kidding yourself.
I have no use for DeWine or the Maine women or McCain. They only serve to give you the illusion they're Republicans, but they're ideological Demorats ontoo many issues. If my Party is going to control the Senate, I want the real thing. It's sort of like kissing your sister. It may feel nice, but it really gets you nowhere.
LOL! That was a good one
I've wondered how the Judiciary Committee would play its hand on this. One thing really good is that NONE of the politicians are having much success hiding. Not the DEMs, not the squishee GOP.
If the DEMs appear to be negotiating in bad faith, we're right back where we started, except some nominations will have been voted on.
lol.
bttt
And who is going to benefit from the "backlash?" The same people who benefit from the split in the Republican party. And who would those people be? Democrats, of course, and Hillary in particular. Maybe she won't even need a 3rd party conservative to siphon off Republican votes. She might be able to win with over 50%. And who would you say is helping her split the party and cause the backlash. (Pardon me, I have to run and get my tin foil hat before I get flamed for this heresy.)
In Lincoln Chaffee's case, he initially ran against a fervently pro-life Democrat.
Now, even though that was the only issue-with perhaps the exception of Indian gaming-on which we agreed, I would have probably cast my ballot for the Dem. in the general election, for the simple reason that he would have stood with the Republican Caucus on a pivotal issue of morality.
Those three will get a vote. They aren't confirmed yet. Senators make all sorts of ugly side deals. The test is still coming - will ALL of the nominees get an up or down vote?
Well, it only takes two of the moderate RINOS to decide they disagree with the liberals interpretation. Warner, Graham, Dewine are all red-state Republicans. And I think that even McCain will not be pleased if they resume filibusters. This is not just a hypothetical, we'll see in the days, weeks and months ahead. We should have a good idea soon.
No, without saying it then it doesn't go. Until Part A, the 'Rats can filibuster in extraordinary circumstances -- which each Senator can decide for themselves. In Part B, changes Rules or interpretations WILL NOT HAPPEN. There is nothing in the agreement that allows a Senator to violate "B" if he disagreed with another Senator's interpretation of "A". You can't just make up cluases that aren't in the clear text of an agreement unless you are a liberal SCOTUS Justice.
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.