1 posted on
10/31/2005 9:33:57 AM PST by
Checkers
To: Checkers
"As I wrote below, the best way to preempt a filibuster is for the nine Republicans thought lukewarm or hostile to the constitutional option to announce, early and often, that they will vote for the constitutional option if Democrats attempt a filibuster based upon ideology. If the Senate Democrats know they are going to lose the vote, they will have to approach this debate much, much differently. And if the MSM loses their filibuster storyline early, it will be difficult to campaign on air to legitimize the practice.
Senator Graham led the way for the nine yesterday, and the other 8 ought to follow:
Senator McCain mccain.senate.gov/index.cfm?fuseaction=Contact.Home (202) 224-2235
Senator Warner warner.senate.gov/contact/contactme.cfm (202) 224-2023
Senator DeWine dewine.senate.gov (202) 224-2315
Senator Chafee chafee.senate.gov/webform.htm (202) 224-2921
Senator Snowe http://snowe.senate.gov/Webform.htm (202) 224-5344
Senator Collins collins.senate.gov/low/contactemail.htm (202) 224-2523
Senator Hagel hagel.senate.gov/index.cfm?FuseAction=Offices.Contact (202) 224-4224
Senator Specter (202) 224-4254 specter.senate.gov/index.cfm?FuseAction=ContactInfo.Home "
2 posted on
10/31/2005 9:35:28 AM PST by
Checkers
(I broke the dam.)
To: Checkers
Knowing that the democrats on the judiciary committee would pull out the long knives on any nomination, Bush was forced to pick another Justice in the mold of Roberts - a Justice that can talk circles around the democrats on the committee and teach them a lesson in constitutional law.
3 posted on
10/31/2005 9:37:20 AM PST by
Go Gordon
To: Checkers
So, has any one of the a-holes, er, senators made a statement in behalf of Alito yet?
4 posted on
10/31/2005 9:38:01 AM PST by
rockrr
(Never argue with a man who buys ammo in bulk...)
To: Checkers
I'm from Boca Raton and I'm just checking in a week after Wilma.
So who's this Alito guy? Is George Bush still president? What's been happening?
Just jokin' y'all. Nice to be back on FR after a week...
5 posted on
10/31/2005 9:38:01 AM PST by
Caipirabob
(Democrats.. Socialists..Commies..Traitors...Who can tell the difference?)
To: sauropod
6 posted on
10/31/2005 9:38:40 AM PST by
sauropod
("Half the harm that is done in this world is due to people who want to feel important." - T.S. Eliot)
To: Checkers
Silly Talk
[Mark R. Levin 10/31 09:54 AM]
On ABC's "Good Morning America," Linda Douglass reported that Sam Alito "is another white male." Actually, as I think about it, he's less white than the show's anchor, Charles Gibson. Alito's skin tone appears to me to be more olive. I wonder, if Janice Rogers Brown had been nominated, would reporters like Linda Douglass have been more impressed? Of course not. Speaking of Gibson, he said that Alito was "very conservative." I don't know what this means. But more importantly, given that Gibson probably hasn't read a single opinion authored by Alito, he's speaking from talking points.
7 posted on
10/31/2005 9:41:24 AM PST by
Reagan Man
(Secure our borders;punish employers who hire illegals;stop all welfare to illegals)
To: Checkers
I applaud Hewitt for being an adult, and wholeheartedly backing this nominee, without a hint of harking back to the recent unpleasantness.
I agree with his opinion here for the most part, but I sincerely think it would be better in the long run if we had the filibuster battle and won it, so it wouldn't rear its ugly head again.
8 posted on
10/31/2005 9:41:33 AM PST by
savedbygrace
("No Monday morning quarterback has ever led a team to victory" GW Bush)
To: Checkers
A LONG fight for SCOTUS can only benefit the republicans..
Democrats will appear sillier and sillier and obstructionist the longer it develops..
The pubbies SHOULD take steps to PROLONG the fight not shorten it..
But again that would be smart.. never happen..
19 posted on
10/31/2005 10:47:50 AM PST by
hosepipe
(CAUTION: This propaganda is laced with hyperbole..)
To: Checkers
26 posted on
10/31/2005 4:57:37 PM PST by
Checkers
(I broke the dam.)
To: Checkers
Hewitt must be a bit off balance from the Miers dustup.
He indicates that Hagel might vote against Alito while ignoring Nelson (D-NE) who seems perfectly willing to go along with Alito on TV tonight during an appearance on MSNBC with Hatch. Certainly, Hatch did the heavy lifting for Alito but Nelson could hardly be described as being in opposition. Still a Democrat but a far more moderate one, one willing to play the Miller card if he likes but without burning his bridges to his base, an aging moderate Democrat and younger liberal Republican base. I don't know that he's too afraid of the GOP recruiting an opponent in his election next year, given that Johanns, the only credible candidate, abandoned his governor's post without completing his term to serve as Bush's ag secretary. This has pretty much ruined Johanns' chances of returning for an '06 run.
Nelson was actually making a tenuous defence of Alito's Casey dissent, mentioning that while he was governor, he helped shepherd a parental notification bill through the Unicameral. I'm not certain everyone in Nebraska would agree with Nelson's characterization exactly but Nelson didn't cause trouble over it either. Nelson also hinted that it may be time to re-visit the abortion issue in general. It is notable that Nelson was willing to provide some cover for Alito on talking points being used against Alito and to try to be positive toward him while not surrendering too much ground. It indicates to me that Nelson is ready to confirm Alito. And that means Hagel must already be fully on board for Alito. Those two are rarely any great distance apart on key issues, especially on red-meat issues. It's not in the interests of either one to be too far apart and Nebraska's conservative voters don't like it.
Anyone who thinks Nelson is going to get to the far Right of Hagel (by Dim and MSM standards) really needs to think again.
Hugh, stop takin' them crazy pills!
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson