Posted on 05/25/2005 12:01:41 PM PDT by JZelle
The arithmetic tells the story. The Democrats won the battle over who gets to shape the federal judiciary. In both tone and substance of their rhetoric, the Democrats believe they won, and who can argue with them? The Republican leadership is subdued, as befits a losers' locker room. The Republicans will pay dearly for the events of Monday night, when seven Democratic and seven Republican senators took over the leadership of the Senate, for a long time to come. Since the Republicans occupy the White House and command what ought to be a solid Senate majority of 55 members, this should have been no contest. But for the sixth and seventh Republican defections, the GOP would have had a rare, even historic, opportunity under the Constitution to nominate and approve, in up-or-down votes, highly qualified judges for the nation's highest courts. Because John McCain, John Warner, Lincoln Chafee, Lindsey Graham, Susan Collins, Olympia Snowe and Mike DeWine abandoned their leaders in the Senate and snubbed the president, that historic opportunity was lost. The deal immediately affects five "pending" appellate-court nominees. The agreement would allow floor votes to proceed for three: Priscilla Owen for the 5th Circuit, Janice Rogers Brown for the D.C. Circuit and William Pryor for the 11th Circuit. The deal immediately dooms the nominations of two others, William Myers III for the 9th Circuit and Henry Saad for the 6th Circuit, by permitting the seven Democratic senators to continue their party's filibusters against them. In addition to these five, Democrats had filibustered five other appellate-court nominees during the 108th Congress, three of whose names were subsequently withdrawn. Democrats threatened to filibuster half a dozen others.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...
those 7 Dems mean nothing, we have two hurdles to cross - 2 Rs need to peel off to change the rules, and even if that happens, we then need their actual votes to approve a judge. they could cut us down at either stage of this - either they don't allow the rules change, or they do, but then don't vote for a judge. By controlling these RINOs in whole or in part, the Dems have two ways to stop any judge. Which of the 7 Dems are going to vote to support a pro-life SCOTUS member to replace a current pro-Roe one? The answer - none of them.
We have not given up the right to an up or down vote on any. The Dems have reserved the "right" to filibuster in the future for extraordinary reasons. As soon as they play that card it will likely be considered bad faith and the rule change will be back on the table. For now we get the vote of advise and consent.
I agree. They're probably just infiltrators anyway hoping the voter's beebers won't stune them out.
mc
we'll see...........
It is an illegal contract precisely because Bush is not a party to it. Unfortunately, being the subhuman slime they are, the DemonRats can still argue that the clause entitles them to fillibuster any nominee who isn't vetted through the MOU's unconstitutional preapproval process and they might get at least 6 of the RINOs who signed it to agree. After all, the 7 nitwits were dumb enough to sign it in the first place.
Frist is a little too gentlemanly for the position, imo.
The party isn't stupid. The Senate leadership is weak and timid and doesn't appear to wish to punish treasonous defectors like the seven dwarfs.
You can make the party much smarter by holding back contributions to any party group that gives money to either of the seven dwarfs. Once they see their contributions taking a nosedive, they'll smarten up real fast.
It's apparent that the old adage that a Republican in office is better than any Democrat is a fallacy. The problem is Liberals and Moderates whether they like elephants or donkeys. Too bad Nast is no longer around to draw an animal just for them.....perhaps a snake would do well.
I think that recall efforts, where possible and feasible, need to be supported, funded and mounted to get these seven out of office or, where not possible, get some good primary challenges going.
When all of usdo our damndest to elect a Republican majority only to have seven snakes like these turn around and spit in our faces, then the others who benefited from our turnout...the President and the Senate and House leadership...need to send each of the seven dwarfs a strong and prejudicial message.
I think you are right and that may get to be a consensus.
I hope you are right and I am wrong. But like they said, it's a matter of trust. I have no trust in the 14 power-grabbers.
Myers and Saad will be filibustered if put up for a vote. Fox (Brit Hume) just reported this is part of the agreement and that the 7 Republican participants agreed to allow the Democrat participants to take part in the filibuster if either name comes to the floor for a vote. We have given up the right (so far) to these two and perhaps all except the three that are part of the written agreement. We have yet to see what other agreements they entered into with the full knowledge of the Republican leadership who kept Frist advised of the negotiations according to Graham.
"For now we get the vote of advise and consent."
What does that mean?
IF McCain and Graham claim to be pro-life, it is barely so. McCain at one time was, or professed to be, but has been less and less the longer he's been in D.C. As for Graham, he has apparently SAID what he thought would get him elected and then done as he pleased. (Not smart to start that stuff as soon as you get there when the voters are still watching, which is why a senator is vulnerable in his 2nd election.) If these two have to get out of the kitchen because they can't stand the heat, they always have Specter, Voinovich, Smith and many more who will step up to the plate and take their place. (I don't know about DeWine either.)
Nice analysis.
Let me add that the "deal" expressly allows the 7 Democrats to vote with their consciences rather than vote with their wacko party "leaders".
It will be interesting to see if the lemming-like pack of MoveOn-led Democrats will NOW start to "lose" a few of its rodents...
No, they would have voted against us. Which is why Frist KNEW we had to cave... he lied to us, and did NOT have the votes. PERIOD.
The hope is that the Dems will do something stupid, allow 2 or 3 of the 7 to say the Dems broke the deal, then vote on the rule change.
nice wishing. won't happen, when it comes to power... democrats KNOW how to it and don't do 'stupid' when abortion is on the line....
Or make them fillibuster and shut the Govt down THEN vote on the change.
at this point it's moot, the agreement has been signed. conservative judges are in federal lockdown and the proceedure for advice and consent, has become institutionally and hopelessly bogged down in the definition of what a baby killer considers to be "extreme" or not.
IDIOT republicans LED by Bush/Frist WASTED their political capital earned in this last election on reworking the old Social Security Ponzi schemata.
what a waste.
exactly.
Where in the U.S. Constitution does it say either the word "up" or the wrod "down"?
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.