Why Frist and all won't go 24/7 (Vanity)

vanity | 8/4/03 | votelife

[votelife]

Freepers, First I apologize in advance for the vanity. I have been very active in the last several months trying to push Estrada's nomination. Pryor recently as he's from my state. On thread after thread I see people complaining at the fact that Frist/Bush won't make the Senate go 24/7. Let me explain this is probably not the best course of action to take right now.

1. The mainstream media- remember how Clinton was able to frame the govt shutdown as the Repubs fault? How easy do you think ABCBSCNNMSNBC will be able to say, right wing republicans block prescription drugs to put an arch-conservative on a court of appeals. I know this is unfair, but who said the NY Times is fair.

2. To go 24/7 from what I've read is MUCH harder on the Repubs than the Dems. Basically, only one Dem would have to be there (they could rotate) while all the Repubs or 50 I guess would have to be there. I'm not exactly sure on the particulars of this, perhaps other Freepers could back me up, but generally, this is tougher on the Repubs than the Dems.

3. It's August, nobody is paying attention. Going 24/7 now might get us judges, it might not. Tough to say how it would play out. Do it August of next year, or OCTOBER of next year, and Bush can tie it into his obstruction case very well.

4. While Bush has been getting beat (FOR NOW) in the Senate, he keeps the pressure on the Dems. After the Estrada filibuster was going, Bush nominated Pryor, an obvious deference to the conservative movement. Bush also nominated Pickering again, and Owen again. These are not the moves of someone who is rethinking the conservative judge strategy. Also, he just nominated Janice Brown, a black conservative who is a California Supreme Court Justice.

5. So basically based on number 4, I think Bush and Rove, are just letting the Dems destroy their party. The Dems will be on record filibustering a qualified Hispanic, a woman, a Catholic, a Baptist, a Black Woman, an Arab. Who knows who else, but this will be a VERY valuable campaign issue.

6. How do you think this obstruction plays in SC, NC, FL, GA, Pennslyvania (key primary between liberal Specter and conservative Toomey), ND, SD, etc? I can tell you that Tom Daschle won't like these obstruction ads running in his state! And how do you think the obstruction of Estrada will play among Hispanics right before the '04 election?

I know in advance some Freepers may accuse me of being a Bush-bot. I could care less. Bush has an excellent job on the pro-life cause. Ramming through some appeals court judges and somewhat removing the issue in '04 may actually HINDER Bush being able to get a conservative confirmed to the Court in the future. Pro life is starting to become more and more of a winning issue for the Repubs. As Bush likes to say, hearts are being changed. Freepers, be patient! I want these judges confirmed as much as the next Freeper, but I think we need to take a longer view of this problem. The Dems are getting more and more extreme, and out of touch with America. '04 is looking good (Hollings announced retirement today, also helping a future GOP Senate).

Now, if a Supreme Court justice retires, than this analysis goes out the window, and it would be time to go nuclear.

So for the Freepers who are upset at Frist, the best way to get these judges confirmed is to help defeat Democrat Senators (and defeat Arlen Specter)!

Comments appreciated, though I won't pay attention to them if they are not well reasoned.

[votelife]

comments?

[votelife]

when I say this it's because it might make it easier for some Dems to retain Senate seats saying they worked with the Pres on judges, as opposed to blindly opposing any and all judges conservative.

[clintonh8r]

I have been a proponent of the nuclear (or, "nuke-you-lur"!) option, but your arguments make some sense. Unfortunately, I don't know enough about the mechanics of a full-blown filibuster to carry on an informed conversation. I disagree with premise #1, though. I think the public would support the president and the Republican senators in a flame war with the media.

[spokeshave]

Also the rats have to pick the fight carefully,...as a lot of judges have been confirmed.

[votelife]

you may be right about number 1, and with radio and the internet, you have a very strong case, but if my 1 is wrong, wouldn't it be better for the future of the Courts if this high stakes battle were played out right before the election so it was fresh on the voter's minds?

Similar to a bill which would push income tax day to right before the elections...

[votelife]

Dems like to say they have confirmed 130 or so of Bush's judges. There are a few problems with this.

1. This is just a guess, but I bet these are more "moderate" Kennedy/O'Connor judges.

2. Or, they're older judges who the left doesn't view as a threat.

3. Or, I and think this is common: the Dems filibuster Appeals level judges and approve District Judges, ie trying to stop Bush from getting the more important posts.

There are good internet sites where you can see that many of Bush's judges just haven't got hearings, so while Dems have voted for most of them, it's only on ones that haven't been stalled, blocked, "blue slipped" etc.

That being said, I'm glad to see some of Bush's judges get through while Estrada and Pryor draw the heat.

[Tax-chick]

I've been one of the people saying, "What's wrong with these Republican wimps?" Your post definitely offers some perspective. What really matters is that we get the conservative judges; whether this route will achieve the goal remains to be seen.

On this issue, as with the administration's Middle East policy, I'm of two minds. I'd like to think that Bush et al are doing something really cagey, so subtle that I just don't get it. However, sometimes I fear that they're just clueless, and actually believe that being nice to people who want to destroy your way of life (Democrats, Saudis, Palestinians) is really going to work.

[Cboldt]

Patience is a virtue. I believe that Bush is ever-so-conscious of the dereliction of the Democrats, and will implement rules that deny a minority of Senators the power to determine the makeup of the judiciary.

[woodyinscc]

You do not have to make any apologies. You have been a tireless, unceasing, and dedicated Freeper on this issue.

Everyone blames Frist and the R Senators, but you are right, this is a well thought out long term strategy by the WH.

President Bush told each of his nominee's that he would stand by them. I guess I'm a Bush-Bot also, and his word is good by me.

[votelife]

Finally, I think Freepers who are really mad at Frist should share some of that anger against the so-called moderate Dems like Breaux, Lincoln, Dorgan, Johnson, Baucus, etc or Dems from "Red" States! It's not Frist's fault if the Dems want to arbitrarily block qualified conservatives.

Look at it from the left's perspective. You don't think Hillary, Dashcle, and Leahy are exerting pressure behind the scenes? How about all the liberal special interest groups. Don't the Freepers who criticize Frist think these groups are reading the Dems the riot act?

[mr.pink]

wouldn't it be better for the future of the Courts if this high stakes battle were played out right before the election so it was fresh on the voter's minds?

You are assuming the GOP can control what the media "spotlight" topic will be....I don't think they can as the media will find/manufacture/hype another issue to "spotlight", and it will surely be one that favors the Dems.

If Bush loses, the American judicial landscape will appear no different than it was when he arrived..

[votelife]

If Bush talks like this, I think he'll stick with his support!

A Bush radio address, slamming the Dems on Estrada
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/849436/posts

[discostu]

3 things you missed:
It's August, DC is on vacation, they can't go 24/7 (they could have started earlier and run into August but the next two show why to not do that)
The Dems have realized they're putting their head in a noose, other than the high profile filibusters we're getting judges through very nicely
Never blow the wad when it won't do any good, this is a ready made campaign issue next November, but not if it gets solved over a year in advance. If they're still filibustering next October it's a great stump speach and might be a good time to force it to 24/7 to really increase the profile.

[Guyin4Os]

It's simpler than all that. They are gonna wait til next election and make it a campaign issue ... especially to force all the incumbent Dems to stay in Washington when they want to be campaigning.

[votelife]

that's true, but if he gets Pryor, Estrada, and Owen on the lower courts, but doesn't get reelected, than a future liberal Supreme Court will likely create lots of liberal havoc, and I don't think many freepers will console themsleves with "Well, at least Estrada's on the DC court, and at least will got that Pryor guy on the 11th circuit court"

Think big picture!

[votelife]

because of my analysis, I have stopped calling/freeping Dem senators on this issue for the most part. I'll call them once in a while, but it's gotten to the point where I'd almost PREFER the so called "moderates" to filibuster. Especially the ones who are up for reelection. At this point, as locked in as the Dems are I think it's more important to call Bush/Frist/Hatch, etc and tell them to keep fighting for the judges. Do we really want say John Edwards to "see the light" on Estrada, make one good vote, and then get stuck with him for 6 more years? If he wants to block Estrada, I'm happy to hang that issue over his head.

[Saundra Duffy]

I won't pay attention to them if they are not well reasoned.

What's well reasoned to you might be very well reasoned to me. Free Miguel!

[votelife]

I could basically reduce my entire argument down to FREE MIGUEL, but I want to get the Frist bashers to look at the larger picture.

That said, Free Miguel!

[votelife]

and for the Freepers who say Bush isn't doing enough, well, he has fought 2 wars, (is still fighting them) and is dealing with Israel/Palestine, and "16 words" and all the Dem harping etc. Bush can't do EVERYTHING.

[votelife]

Here's an example of the kind of letter that will help us get the court we want:

Dear President Bush,
With the Surpeme Court session getting ready to close, it may well be time for perhaps the most important domestic decision of your presidency: the appointment of a Supreme Court Justice(s). The main reason why I supported you in 2000 and why I wanted Daschle out of power in 02 (and 04) has to do with the courts. I want America courts to interpret law, not write law. During your presidential campaign you said Thomas and Scalia were your two model justices. Those are excellent models. The High Court needs more like them. Clarence Thomas recently said to students that the tough cases were when what he wanted to do was different from what the law said. And he goes by the law. This should be a model philosophy for our justices. Your father, President Bush lost his reelection campaign for 3 main reasosn, as far as I can see. 1. he broke the no new taxes pledge 2. David Souter 3. Clinton convinced people we were in a Bush recession (which we had already come out of by the time Clinton was getting sworn in)

I urge you to learn from all three of these: 1. on taxes, you're doing great. Awesome job on the tax cut. 2. good job so far on judicial appointments. I want to see more of a fight for Estrada, Owen, and Pickering, but I commend you on your nominations. 3. by staying engaged in the economic debate you'll serve yourself well

I have been thoroughly impressed with your handling of al Queida, Iraq, and terrorism. You have inspired confidence and have shown great leadership.

But I want to remind you that your Supreme Court pick(s) will be with us LONG after you have departed office. I urge you to avoid the tempation to find a "compromise" pick. Go for a Scalia or Thomas. Don't go for an O'Connor or Kennedy. To be specific, get someone who is pro-life. Roe v Wade is one of the worst court decisions I know of, and it's the perfect example of unrestrained judicial power.

I know the temptation will be tremendous on you to nominate a moderate. But remember who your true supporters are. I am not a important leader or politician. I am "simply" a citizen who has been an enthusiatic supporter of you. I am willing to accept compromise in many areas of government but I will watch your Court nomiantions extremely closely. What the Senate Dems are doing right now is disgusting, but as the President you have the bully pulpit to stop it. Democrats will back down if you turn up serious heat on them.

Moreover, I think public opinion is shifting towards the pro-life position. Dems will want you to nominate a moderate, but almost all will vote against you anyways. Pro-choice Repubs will likely still vote for you if you nominate a Scalia, after all, you campaigned on it. So Mr. President, I urge you to stick with your campaign statements and nominate justices who believe in judicial restraint, like Scalia and Thomas.

Happy Memorial Day and may God bless you and your family.