Idiot GOP Senate Set to Shaft Estrada?

rushlimbaugh ^ | 2/28/2003 | rushlimbaugh

[TLBSHOW]

I am more frosted at the Democrats for what they're doing to the Constitution vis-à-vis Miguel Estrada's than I am over the anti-war movement. Fox News reported that the GOP planned to call for a cloture vote on Estrada next week knowing they'd lose it. That would effectively amend the Constitution - illegally - to read that you need 60 votes instead of 51 to get a judicial nomination through.

Happily, it turns out the GOP isn't going to call such a vote. The offices of Senators Santorum and Hatch rang up my office on Friday, and said that the Fox story is not accurate. There will be no cloture vote. Hooray! If these Democrats want to filibuster the first Hispanic nominee to the D.C. Circuit Court, let them do it! I know they say there are new rules making a filibuster harder, but so what? And don't tell me that it's not "practical" anymore, because people have to go to the bathroom. That's nothing new.

Force them to get out there and filibuster this eminently qualified man, as rated unanimously by the American Bar Association. Miguel Estrada is just a name to us, but his life is being destroyed here. It's not because he's unqualified; it's because Democrats don't like how he might think. Read George Will's column. Chuck Schumer didn't bother to ask Estrada a single question. He claims not to know any less qualified judge, when in fact he knows less qualified judges who went to the Supreme Court! Just this week, President Bush pledged to stand by Estrada until he was sworn in. We know no other nominee has been asked to give nor should give opinions on issues that may come before the court. Their job is to apply the law, not to make law or let their opinions get in the way of rulings.

These senators have to back Bush and Estrada up. The Democrat attitude is, "We ran Washington for 40 years up until 1994, and Bush is illegitimate despite what the Constitution says about the Electoral College, so he has no right to appoint anyone." These people are treating the Constitution like toilet paper. Calling a cloture vote would overturn more than two centuries of Senate precedent and rewrite the constitutional definition of "advise and consent." We cannot allow that to happen. You have to care about this, folks!

These people aren't Democrats or liberals. They don't believe in the Constitution. They don't believe in individual rights, as affirmed in the 9th Amendment; in sharing power with the states, as described in the 10th Amendment; in free political speech protected in the 1st Amendment and shredded in campaign finance reform. They don't support the right to bear arms provided for in the 2nd Amendment. They don't respect private property rights protected by the 5th Amendment! If there's a blade of grass in the backyard, they call it "wetlands" and take it away! This assault must stop.

Listen to Rush...

(...react to the Fox News story, and reject the notion of a cloture vote by the GOP) (...demand Democrats be made to pay a price for shredding the Constitution)

Read More of Rush's Estrada Coverage… (Rush On A Roll: Anatomy of a Smear) (Rush On A Roll: Want Estrada? Declare Linda Daschle DOA) (The Limbaugh Library: Ken Starr Tips Us Off on Estrada) (EIB A-B: Estrada Qualifications Blow Away Breyer and Ginsburg)

Read the Questionable Fox News Article...

(FoxNews: Republicans Seek to End Debate on Estrada)

Read the George Will Column on Estrada...

(Washington Post: Coup Against the Constitution - George F. Will)

[justshe]

Does that mean TLB won't answer questions too?

[Howlin]

Hey, me, too! It's the first nice day we've had in WEEKS. Roll on!

[TLBSHOW]

I called Grover Norquest a traitor not the President and you know that. But go ahead and play the smear game.

Hey, it's personal (If you can't win the debate, smear your opponent)
townhall ^ | March 1, 2003 | Bill O'Reilly


Second, my analysis of the chaotic border situation has resulted in my being labeled anti-Mexican, even though I have also focused on the Canadian border and blamed much of the problem on Presidents Clinton and Bush. No one disputes that the porous borders are dangerous in this age of terrorism, and it is undeniable that Mexican nationals themselves are being killed and injured trying to illegally cross over. Yet the fact that I would call for the military to back up the Border Patrol makes me an enemy of an entire ethnic group.

Three, as you may know, my television program was instrumental in breaking the Sami al-Arian story nationally a year and a half ago. During that time, I was routinely described as being anti-Muslim. And even AFTER al-Arian was arrested on terrorism charges, the two television critics working for Tampa Bay newspapers attacked me as being unfair and using McCarthy-like tactics.

Now, I can take the heat. I dish out plenty of commentary and have to expect backlash. But the personal attacks that are launched by special interest groups in this country have reached critical mass -- they are intruding on freedom of the press.

Threats of racial demonization have put a tremendous fear into the journalism industry. These kind of tactics have prevented some news organizations from covering news that is vital to the nation.

Bill O'Reilly

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/854348/posts?page=

[woodyinscc]

"Where the Senate has abused its advise-and-consent power, using the power to make recess appointments seems to me to be perfectly appropriate."

I agree with you! I Just think the longer we play this out
the more it becomes politically expediant, and harder to use against us. I think we are in a win, win situation.


Like I said, ArneFafkin has aptly pointed this out!

[Political Junkie Too]

I personally agree that pre-1913 (meaning pre-17th amendment) would change things.

You are focusing on the number of Senators who would have been appointed from Democrat states, implying that they'd support the filibuster. I focus on the interests that those Senators would be representing. We have such partisan hatred today because the Senators are rogue politicians who form their own "gangs" in the Senate (the Dems and the Reps, each with their own colors and symbols). They stand together as a bloc once they are elected, and they are elected by a nationally-managed coalition (called the RNC and DNC) that funds their campaigns.

If you had Senators appointed by state legislatures, I believe that you won't see the cohesion that you see today where Democrats and Republicans form blocs to preserve their national interests -- you'd see more loosely coupled relationships that come and go whenever state interests coincide.

-PJ

[ez]

I love you both dearly but if you spent as much time as you spend battling TLBSHOW on battling the Demosocialists, they wouldn't stand a chance.

[cyncooper]

That was before you started calling George W. Bush a traitor, a commie liberal rat, saying he was just like Bill Clinton, and implying he was in bed with the terrorists.

And today we have this gem:

Its still interesting to note those that would shut down this discussion and why they want to protect the democrats in the senate and their socialist goals to destroy this country and The Bush Presidency..

I'm off to work a Girl Scout cookie booth so will check back later to see just who is being accused of protecting dems and has socialist goals to destroy this country and the Bush Presidency. It SOUNDS like it's those who disagree with Rush and the poster who stated the above.

[Howlin]

I can do both.

[Howlin]

You: I called Grover Norquest a traitor not the President and you know that. But go ahead and play the smear game.

Really? Perhaps you should inform this man then:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/backroom/845727/posts?page=259#259

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/852607/posts?page=119#119

Or is he wrong, too?

[justshe]

I actually migrated to this thread via the Estrada thread and the Fox news dustup. I went to bed one night wondering if the GOP was going to cave, as reported by Fox....to get up the next morning to the news that it was an error on the part of Fox.

I don't follow TLB around looking for his posts. But when I see one of his posts that is blatant disinformation, I do respond. But then, it is NOT just Howlin or I that respond as your 'ping' seems to imply.

[RobFromGa]

Next you'll be saying that YOUR (TLB's) posting on FR is what caused the whole thing. -- Howlin

I actually know for sure that it was my phone call to President Bush yesterday that changed this whole thing around.

He also called me a few minutes ago and told you two to chill out or he was going to shut off the Internet.

[Howlin]

I saw you try to take credit for that........LOL.

[RobFromGa]

This is like being a fly on the wall at the Carville-Matalin home.

[rwfromkansas]

It is a question headline, which leads me to believe this headline was intended for shock value, not a factual judgment.

[justshe]

I'm betting that Mary has this embroidered as a wall-hanging hung somewhere in her home:

dis·in·for·ma·tion

1. Deliberately misleading information announced publicly or leaked by a government or especially by an intelligence agency in order to influence public opinion or the government in another nation: “He would be the unconscious channel for a piece of disinformation aimed at another country's intelligence service” (Ken Follett).

2. Dissemination of such misleading information.

If not......she should!

[rwfromkansas]

With a question headline, a factual judgment is not necessarily implied. I have a hard time believing Rush was calling the GOP idiots in reality; I believe this was intended as a shock value headline, not as a statement of his thoughts about the story per se.

Consider that the whole point of what he says below the headline is to DEBUNK the very notion expressed in the headline!

[justshe]

Speaking of the Carville-Matalin home.....how do you suppose they teach their children about lying?

Suppose Mommy punishes for a lie, and Daddy rewards for a lie?

[RobFromGa]

Exactly/

Just like "Nuclear War To Begin In North Korea Tomorrow?" would likely be a story about why it wasn't going to happen.

If they were going to cave, then the sensational headline would be declarative: Spineless GOP Wimps Out on Estrada. (not question mark). The ? is a sign the answer will be NO.

[RobFromGa]

Suppose Mommy punishes for a lie, and Daddy rewards for a lie?

The kid would definitely be a Republican. He would get positive credit from Mom for the truth, and credit from Dad who would think he was lying when talking as a Republican.

[justshe]

LOL!