Whether WE like it or not, if Specter nixes a judicial nominee, that person WILL be defeated.
McLame, Chaffee, Warner, Collins and Snowe WILL join him.
Result: 49-51 against.
Only the earlier (apparent) "deal" by the President and Frist that kept him in charge of the judiciary committee has kept him on board. Now that Miers has been denied her "up-or-down" vote, he can justifiably make the case that a nominee is not necessarily entitled to a vote.
I wasn't really crazy about Miers, but denying her a vote was a disaster in the making for sometime in the future.
Miers was not denied an up or down vote. She withdrew. POTUS accepted the withdrawal because she would have LOST the up or down vote.
If Alito is confirmed, will you withdraw your idea that having her pulled was a disaster?
"I wasn't really crazy about Miers, but denying her a vote was a disaster in the making for sometime in the future."
Like putting her on the bench without any qualifications would be any less a disaster???
Well, the committee didn't deny her a vote, nor did the Senate. She withdrew. I think Specter would have a hard time with pushing that line.
Oh. We have a one-man confirmation/rejection process now, eh?
I don't think so.
McLame, Chaffee, Warner, Collins and Snowe WILL join him. ... Result: 49-51 against.
So be it. If the Senate votes on the nomination, and it goes down, the process will have worked. Hopefully the Senators will be on record regarding their justification, and the people can consider that at the next election.
"I wasn't really crazy about Miers, but denying her a vote was a disaster in the making for sometime in the future."
By that reasoning, Bernard Kerik's withdrawal was a disaster, too. Yet I didn't hear many here claiming that he had been cheated of a vote...
The up or down issue applies to Senate filibusters, not withdrawals. The latter happen all the time, and are perfectly appropriate.
I wasn't really crazy about Miers, but denying her a vote was a disaster in the making for sometime in the future.
@@@@@@
What bothered me the most was the exposure of "principled" conservatives that they are as near-sighted as "pure-politics-no-principles" democrats. Our side always castigated the left for not wanting the Advise and Consent process to proceed. As I see the future, standing on that principle is gone forever. I guess I am more sad than any other emotion at the revelation of the hypocrisy and shortsightedness.
We have reduced all nominees to a fight over their political leanings. As Mark Steyn said, we are getting a system of rule by nine parliamentarians. I do not think we will like who gets on the court in the future, when libs are in the driver's seat. We have given up what little leverage over their picks that I thought we had.
"Whether WE like it or not, if Specter nixes a judicial nominee, that person WILL be defeated."
Both Specter and Alito have Yale in their blood. Specter will vote for him.
McLame, Chaffee, Warner, Collins and Snowe WILL join him.
The conservative pressure this time may be too much for these mushy guys after they weigh the pros and cons. There weak spines bend in two ways.
get a grip. She wasn't denied an up or down vote. She was withdrawn (officially withdrew herself) becuase the base of the president's party demanded someone better.
That is nowhere near the same as fillibustering a nominee in the senate. Stop being intellectually dishonest.