Filibuster deal: Freepers, please "hold your powder"

n/a | 05/24/05 | jdsteel

[L,TOWM]

Tell Myers and Saad how well this arrangement "works".

[oldbrowser]

Does anyone believe that the DEMS would have allowed us to "save face" had we been in the minority?

They did more than save face, they established that they can summarily dismiss two of Bush's judicial nominees with only 41 votes.

They established that they can obstruct a president for five years with no payback.

They established that the Republican leadership with a solid majority in the senate is toothless and has no control of it's members.

[Truth Table]

Couple O'things:

If the shoe is ever on the other foot, the donks will nuke the filibuster in a nanosecond. We need to realize this as a fact

I've read several posts where folks have aparently said a pox on republicans; that they are out of the party.

Let me remind those of you who entertain these thoughts that there are folks in the senate willing to tear liberalism up by root, or to use a byrd paraphrase to break its back, neck legs, and arms. Kyl, Isakisson and Burr come right off the bat. we need to beat the RINOS. We cannot give up on republicans. We cannot throw out the baby with the bathwater. We need to drain the bathwater and refill the tub.

Yes, this sucks. Yes, I am pissed. But am I gonna give up on Kyl and Burr and those like them? NO. I am going to work harder at expelling RINOS than I did at getting Bush reelected. That's what I'm gonna do.

Get the W bumper stickers back on the SUVs folks. Don't lay down for this by giving up. Beat the RINOS.

[dfwgator]

The Dems promised to only filibuster in EXTREME CIRCUMSTANCES.

But who gets to determine what are Extreme Circumstances? The Rats, that's who. Pubbies get played again.

[GB]

And go over to DU and you'll see the same rantings in reverse, LOL!

Seriously, a part of me would've liked to see this played out to completion, but I'm willing to step back and see what happens with this because I understand how politics work in Washington. I don't like how politics in Washington work sometime, but barring a real revolution we're not going to change how politics work in Washington anytime soon.

[Search4Truth]

Apparently the Dems took Frist seriously or they would not have conceded these three judges. Frist gets some credit for that. It would have been nice to win the war outright, but a bloodless victory in this particular battle is good news. In the next battle, we'll be stronger, they'll be weaker.

Power perceived, is power achieved.

[Oliver Optic]

Getting the up or down vote is the target in this issue. We get that....

No up or down vote on Myers and Saad.

[shhrubbery!]

The Dems promised to only filibuster in EXTREME CIRCUMSTANCES.
But they allow the 3 judges they considered the most extremee, Brown, Owen and Prior..

This is a great point.

William Pryor is probably the most "extreme" judge the Dims could imagine.

Pryor is the nominee who, in his confirmation hearings before the judiciary committee, called Roe v. Wade "the worst abomination in the history of Constitutional law" !

Pryor is that outfront and in-your-face.

If the Dims are "letting" Pryor through without a filibuster, it's going to be difficult for them to justify filibustering any other pro-life nominee.

This proves that the Dims blinked.

[texasbluebell]

See my post 187.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1409337/posts?page=187#187

Sounds like it's going to hinge on a nominee's opinion of "choice" -- every nominee will have to state how they would vote on that issue -- otherwise it's going to be "extraordinary circumstances".

[ElPatriota]

*** THE 7 WEASELS ***

It has a certain ring to it... I like it. Can anyone top it :)

[pawdoggie]

The "upside" of this deal, as others have already pointed out, is that three previously unacceptable, "threat to the nation" conservative judges have been approved; making it difficult (but not impossible) for the Democrats to claim "extreme circumstances" in opposing future Presidential nominees. The "downside" (and it is a big downside) is that the "moderate" Republicans like McCain have (de facto, if not de jure) established that there is a "right" to filibuster judicial nominees, thereby frustrating future attempts to employ the Constitutional Option in the event that the Democrats violate this understanding. I get the feeling that the what will trigger the "extreme circumstances" clause of this deal is not so much who the President nominates, but what court the nominee is to join. So that if the President were to attempt to "pack" the 9th Circus Court with conservative justices, the Democrats would respond with a filibuster. This does not give any of us any comfort as we look down the road to the big enchilada, possible vacancies on the US Supreme Court. That's when we will see if this deal is worth the paper it wasn't written on.

[drpix]

jdsteel: "If a nominated judge gets blocked by filibuster again, we can still "pull the trigger" on the constitutional option..."

theDentist: "My understanding is , "No, we cannot". "

I'm with theDentist. The 7 RINOs have declared they would not vote to end the filibuster for judicial nominees PERIOD. In return, the 7 Dem hustlers agreed not to filibuster UNLESS... Here from the text of the "DEAL", is how the 7 RINOs committed to the sell out of the President (italics added):

Part II: Commitments for Future Nominations

A. Future Nominations. Signatories will exercise their responsibilities under the Advice and Consent Clause of the United States Constitution in good faith. Nominees should only be filibustered under extraordinary circumstances, and each signatory must use his or her own discretion and judgment in determining whether such circumstances exist.

B. Rules Changes. In light of the spirit and continuing commitments made in this agreement, we commit to oppose the rules changes in the 109th Congress, which we understand to be any amendment to or interpretation of the Rules of the Senate that would force a vote on a judicial nomination by means other than unanimous consent or Rule XXII.

Note that this commitment is for the duration of the 109th.

[GB]

I agree on Pryor, I think he'll be a great judge and is a potential USSC nominee, IMHO, but there were some absolutists here willing to throw him over the side and calling him a CINO (conservative in name only) because he personally prosecuted Roy Moore's removal from office in Alabama and because he voted against the Schindlers in the 11th Circuit.

[BJClinton]

Huh? The GOP is the majority with plenty of Constitutional options to get good judges through to put a stop to the likes of the Ninth Circus yet they caved-in. Seems like a legitimate reason to vote third party.

[drpix]

See post # 212. (I missed you on the addressees line.)

[TomasUSMC]

from DU: if you ask me what was resolved today, the GOP like a big bully on the playground basically told the Dems that they promise not to kick their asss if they give them their lunch money and not in the future as long as they continue giving their lunch money in the form of the judicial nominees....And anytime the Dems stop giving the lunch money (aka threatening to filibuster a judicial nominee) then they will kick our assses again....

I say, take their money,
........ their shoes, their books, their sister AND kick their butt.

[BJungNan]

Not true. There was no point in the Pubs forcing the issue when they knew the 7 RINOS wouldn't show up for them. Those RINOS were led by McShame who's only goal was to usurp power from Frist and belittle Bush.

No point? No point in making a stand on something as important as judicial nominations. Nice strategy you have. Give up without a fight.

The problem is, there is no way the 7 RINOS were going to follow Bush or the Senate leadership. That is because neither Bush nor the Republican Senate leadership showed any leadership on this issue. If you don't lead, noone can follow. What did you want the 7 RINOS to do, mill about aimlessly as Bush and the Republican "leadership" have done on this issue.

Sorry, you are all wrong on this.

[Truth Table]

I was with theDentist but now am not. The deal hinges upon the spirit, not the letter of the agreement. It is stated in the MOU. If two RINOS see a breaking of the "spirit" Warner would be one, I think, then the whole ball of wax melts.

Frist just mentioned it on CSPAN2 and Reid is now trying to argue with First on that point. Reid is still scared, IOW.

Sessions up on CSPAN2