Posted on 05/24/2005 6:55:47 AM PDT by AliVeritas
FReepers be prepared for surprises today.
(Excerpt) Read more at c-span.org ...
Funny, I don't recall anything in the oath of office about protecting and defending Senate traditions. It does seem to mention something about the US Constitution though.
I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God.
Yeah, it seems we sometimes forget how to use the preview option.
Allen is kicking BUTT! Tom DeLay was on FNC! Yahoo My hero!!!
Thats true but this is mostly about the SC, not these judges. Plus the 7 threw overboard at least two of the presidents nominees.
We all knew him that well through MONICA,and Paula Jones. Way more than we ever wanted to know.
Mark Levin is tearing McQueeg a new one and excoriating each and every one of the 7 dwarves. He says that McLamebrain is for open borders and has handed the Senate to the Dems.
BRAVO Mark...keep hitting McCaine hard!
It's a beautiful city to visit! Way left, of course, but a nice vacation spot.
LINK?
Talk about way left, I live about 10 miles from Boulder. It's almost as left as you can get.
Check it out-
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1409724/posts?page=1
I thought the Moderates were supposed to restore peace?
Tremendous post.
Wow.
THe agreement of the band of 14 is between each other. But it pledges them to vote certain ways in certain circumstances.
The Democrats have 45 votes for a filibuster. The Republicans had 55 votes for the constitutional option.
If the Democrats lose 5 votes, they can't filibuster. Seven democrats have pledged to no longer go along with their party's mindless filibusters. If those 7 stay true to their word, filibusters are over, because we have 62 votes to invoke cloture.
If the Republicans "lose" 6 votes, they can't get a majority for the nuclear option. Seven republicans have pledged not to invoke the nuclear option so long as democrats give them 3 guaranteed votes and then only filibuster in "extraordinary circumstances".
If 3 of the 7 democrats decide that circumstances are "extraordinary" and join thier 38 buddies in a filibuster, THEN if 2 of the republicans decide that the circumstances are NOT extraordinary, they can renege on the deal and we have 50 votes for the nuclear option.
It doesn't make ANY difference if 48 other Republicans want to pull the nuclear trigger, if the seven vote against it.
It doesn't make ANY difference if 38 other Democrats think the situation is "extraordinary" and try to filibuster, if the seven democrats vote to invoke cloture.
That is why Lindsay only cares about these 7 democrats. So long as THEY don't support the filibuster, there will be no filibusters.
At the moment, absolutely NO judge is in a worse state than they were before. The 7 republicans have not offered any votes AGAINST the candidates, nor have they agreed to SUPPORT a filibuster. Three candidates are getting votes who weren't before, and we didn't have to invoke the nuclear option.
If Graham is to be believed, all the other nominees will get up-or-down votes even though it is not "promised". He thinks at least one will lose the confirmation vote. My guess is that one will be withdrawn instead, once the President is told that the votes aren't there to confirm.
Graham was a little rattled on Hanitty, but I believe that is what he was saying. All the other michigan judges are getting votes, that was already a done deal.
A way of looking at this that might not be right is this:
The seven democrats didn't like the way filibusters were being used, but didn't think they should be eliminated. They couldn't therefore sign an agreement that forbid filibusters, that would be the same as voting for the nuclear option.
But they also didn't want the republicans to use the nuclear option to eliminate filibusters. So, they used the seven republicans to give them cover for breaking with their party on the filibuster. They actually have expressed a willingness to give a vote to all the nominees. They couldn't put that in writing because it was just like eliminating the filibuster altogether. And they needed the republicans to give them something, so they could justify to their own party breaking the filibuster on Owens et. al.
Reid is politically savvy enough to take credit for this like this is what they wanted all along. But that simply cannot be true.
2 years ago, there was no nuclear option, and they were filibustering judges. The filibuster was their position, and now they lost it on at least some judges. The democrats weren't filibustering to "protest our threat of the nuclear option". On the contrary, we threatened the nuclear option in response to their filibuster.
So the Democrats had a plan (filibuster all judges). We had a THREAT. In response to our threat, they now won't be filibustering all judges. And seven DEMOCRATS are on record that the filibuster was inappropriate, and have broken with their party.
And now that they have, we can see how fractured the democrats have been on the filibuster. You have to admire the party's strength to hold them all in line. On today's filibuster vote, only SEVEN democrats were signatories to an agreement to vote for cloture. Every other democrat was free to vote their conscience.
And 26 of them voted AGAINST the filibuster. THat is over half of all the democrats. When allowed to vote without party loyalty, it turns out that only a minority of the democrats support their own party's position on the use of the filibuster.
I have often wondered if this was not the case. Only a minority of democrats EVER speak on the floor during these judicial fights. Now we see why.
OK, that was ONE way of looking at this. Am I right? Am I wrong? We can all have opinions about how likely I am to be right or wrong, but there is nothing in the actual record to show that this is wrong yet.
So now let's watch what happens over the next few weeks. Graham could be blowing smoke, or maybe this IS a deal which will get up-or-down votes on all the current nominees who make it out of committee. We don't believe him, but he hasn't been PROVEN WRONG YET.
We will know soon enough, and there is plenty of time to react.
Lindsay Graham put his name on something that most of us don't think he should have. But he is SAYING the right things, he is talking as if he is still on our side.
Think about that in contrast to Voinovich, who really DID stab Lugar in the back by essentially saying the democrats were right and the president was wrong.
Lindsay isn't saying that the judges deserve to be filibustered, he is actually saying that they all deserve a vote. He thinks he was part of a deal that will acheive that, and he asks us to wait until a judge DOESN'T get a vote before we condemn him.
It's not like we have something better to do.
When a police officer yells "Stop, or I'll shoot", if the person stops the officer doesn't usually get upset about not getting to shoot.
ROFLMAO---
In Oregon, if you re-reg as Indy, will you still be able to see candidates from other parties on your ballot? IOW, if you DO want to vote for a GOP candidate, will you be able to?
In CA, if you re-reg as "undeclared", then you see everyone from all parties; it's the only way you truly get to pick from the whole lot.
Excellantly summarized.
Look, I don't hold Frist and the 48 responsible for the idiot seven. But am I inclined to volunteer right now? No. And if we don't have any passion to volunteer, even if we did vote as an after thought, it wouldn't be enough. The Republican's success is dependant on the grassroots that walk the beat and right now that support is verging on collapse in disgust and a feeling we cannot win.
But Mark is his wonderful, brilliant self. He just asked : " Do you stand with Alexander Hamilton, or with McCaine, who seized power on his own, because he couldn't get it through an election.
What you just said is 100% true. Well said!
I wish I could, I'm not much of a PhotoShop maven tho.
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.