Posted on 01/30/2008 7:19:07 AM PST by ECM
When conservatives lay out their long list of apostasies committed by John McCain, one of them is always his role in the Gang of 14, the 7 Democrats and 7 Republicans in the Senate who agreed to a judicial compromise in 2005. The deal that was struck eliminated the use of the "nuclear option" by the then-GOP-controlled Senate, and also limited the Democratic minority's ability to use the filibuster to block certain judicial nominees (at the time the deal was stuck, there were no pending Supreme Court nominations, only Appellate Court nominations were being held up).
To put it plainly, the critics of the deal are flat out wrong. Conservatives should thank John McCain and the other Senators who were part of the Gang of 14 for getting three Appeals Court nominees who had been held up, Janice Rogers Brown, William Pryor, and Priscilla Owen, approved quickly and Brett Kavanaugh approved a bit later, and for Samuel Alito making it onto the Supreme Court without a filibuster blocking his way. And they should thank John McCain for preserving for the Republican Party the use of the filibuster on judicial nominations that might be made by a Democratic President beginning in 2009 or later.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
Wonder what our punishment will be for refusal to join this new wonder GANG??? Maybe GITMO?
I’m not a McCain fan, but this is exactly what a conservative Hill staffer working on judicial nominations told me when the deal was announced.
You may oppose him for many reasons, but Baehr is right—the Gang of 14 worked to the advantage of the conservatives.
President Bush asked the Senate the other night for them to get on with their duty of up or down votes on appellate vacancies.... He did not beg for more GANG lead deals because the gangsters are now in control.
Has it really been alone, the [implied] threat of Democrat filibuster that had held up all the Bush nominees? Is it that simple? I wish it were, for then it would all be easier.
What about now, or the near future --- after the next presidential election? Do we want to not be able to filibuster a Shrillary nominee? We need not do it each and every time. In fact, we should negotiate from what strength we have [close to half the seats] and filibuster enough against the Ruth Ginsberg types, that they know we mean business.
Of course, when Republicans do it, then the media gets critical of them, while conveniently ignoring that the Democrats have long proven themselves to be the obstructionists, when it comes to to judicial nominees nominated by the opposition Party's President, regardless of how doing that reflexively, Jack-ass party style, can be even worse news for this country, then appointing a judge one hold ambivalence for...
Fools Logic! The nuclear option would have removed the filibuster, so these judges would have been confirmed anyway. It is the 4 or 5 that got thrown overboard that were lost by McCain's actions. McCain sold out! Put lipstick on a pig and it's still a pig!
There is no argument for the Gang of 14. If it is right (and constitutional) for nominees to have a filibuster free up or down vote, it doesn't matter which party is in power. Right, Wrong and constitutionality are not determined by which party is in power. Right is Right, Wrong is Wrong and the constitution is written in plain, simple, clear, understandable English.
I did that with Bush 41 and he lost to Clinton. I did that with Bob Dole. And he lost to Clinton. I did that with Bush Junior, and the Republican Party as well as the country lost.
I'm not holding my nose and picking poisons anymore. I'm done with that.
They don't respond to threats.
Maybe they'll respond to not being elected.
You have got to be kidding.
It was a direct undercutting of the Presidents authority to appoint judges.
He joined with the Democrats specifically because he didn’t like the appointments. He wanted to make the appointments himself.
That is Politics over principle.
Why would anyone vote for the synthetic when you can get the genuine in Mrs Clinton? At least you know she is going to run the country down the drain, and they will not blame Republicans.
So the gang of 14 which got 4 judges approved as opposed to the nuclear option which would have garnered many more?
I think not.
All judges nominated deserve a vote, either negative or affirmative, after a fair hearing. That includes the Democrat nominees. It does not benefit the judicial system to have nominees languish for years on end and possibly lose their law practices if they are not confirmed. Fundamental fairness and a working political system dictates that all nominees should receive a vote.
I do.
I was so angry at the Democrats at that time for holding up those appointments that I wanted Frist to use the nuclear option on them. But now that the shoe is very likely to be on the other foot next year with a Democrat president appointing judges and Justices I'm glad that he didn't set a precedent by doing so.
Of course that doesn't guarantee that Reid won't go nuclear anyway if a Democrat president's appointments are filibustered or otherwise held up, but I can't see our wimpy Repub Senators filibustering anything. And anyway the Dems may have well over 60 Senators seated next year if the Democrats win the whole enchilada by a landslide, which appears quite possible now after Republicans are left with a gang of four liberal losers to choose our nominee from. After seeing the GOP voters rejecting every conservative candidate and embracing RINOs in every primary held so far, I don't believe the Republican's 12 year run of Congressional control that ended in '06 will resume for a long, long time, if ever.
I've been fooling myself since Barry Goldwater in '63.
Enough is enough.
I cannot disagree, but then you and I don't run the U.S. Senate! That said, they can be pressured.
It will be a about full year, before there will be a newly elected President sworn in. That's a long time [more] to have Circuit Court seats sitting empty. Meanwhile, justice delayed, is justice denied, as the saying goes.
Maybe, like starting right now, the Republicans should put their heads together, and figure out how to PUSH the nominees to a vote, even if many of the nominees would get voted down? That would releave the "left hanging" aspect. Still to be addressed, would be filling the seats. So Bush would get another round of nominees, which he and other Republicans should then push? Push it all out into the open. Make people look at the nominees, and have the Democrats explain to everyone, on a case-by-case basis, just exactly why they won't vote for them.
It’s time for the media to make McCain a conservative. This should be good.
Don't feel lonesome, I am firmly resolved to never again vote for a RINO at any level of government. If the majority of the party's voters want to reject every conservative on the primary ballot and leave us with a gang of four liberals to choose a nominee from, then the GOP doesn't represent me any longer and is no longer my party.
There is no candidate on the present list who I can vote for in November. I could possibly vote for Huckleberry because of his strong stands on abortion, 2nd Amendment rights, "gay" marriage, and other social issues, but he has too many negatives on other issues to be an acceptable choice. And even if the incredible happens and he is nominated against all odds, he would be buried ten feet deep by either Hildebeast or Sheik Barack Hussein Obama.
I have voted Republican in every national level election since Nixon vs JFK in 1960, and I had to hold my nose in most of those elections in order to do it. But enough is enough and that 48 year string has now come to an end. I still want to vote at every opportunity, and I will soon be looking around for an acceptable 3rd party candidate who I can vote for next November without a clothespin on my nose.
Actually the Constitution gives Congress the power to make it's own rules and procedures, see article 1, section 5, clause 2.
The filibuster has long been recognized as a legitimate tactic in Senate proceedings in accordance with that clause. You had better hope it's not done away with, because it may well be the only restraint on the Democrat Senate for the next 8 years of Democrats controlling both houses of Congress and the White House.
well said
Not yet, but wait until after the landslide of '08 and see how the count stands.
GOP primary voters appear to be stupid enough to only offer conservatives a choice between four certified liberal RINOs for nomination, and that's how it stands now that Fred was forced to drop out after he was soundly rejected in supposedly conservative SC by Pubbies who preferred three RINOs over him.
IMHO a Democrat landslide is almost certain now, and Democrats will defeat several of the current Pubby Senators who hold weak seats and also elect Democrats to some of the seats left open by retiring Pubbies. I think it's possible that they could even gain a 2/3 majority in both houses that could pass constitutional amendments, and that's just too scary to even think about.
The Gop congress critters should campaign against the “do nothing Congress” of Reid and Pelosi.
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.