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]

that's why I've basically stopped calling Dem senators for Estrada. They can't stand the guy. I don't want them to support Estrada just to get re-elected. What good is one token conservative vote in exchange for 6 more years of liberal votes. I either want the Dems to decide to accept Estrada without outward public pressure from Bush (thereby the Dems admit they position was ludicrous, which will likely never happen) OR I'd like to see the Dems get hammered on Estrada in the next election. After all that Estrada has gone through, I'd like to see the Dems pay for it in the one are that they recognize, a loss of power.

[#3Fan]

Sounds good to me. Dems are all about power, they'll prostitute anything for power.

[chiller]

Ditto frustrations with apparent non-action, but we're getting so close to the next and more important election cycle...IN WHICH 'W' himself will be on the bully pulpit big time on the campaign trail. The longer we've had to wait, the stronger our case has become, as the Pryor/abortion/Catholic issue underscores.

'W' has made us hold our nose with some liberal/costly legislation passed this session...but he weakened the Dems campaign issues dramatically, so I look at it like a super wind-up for a 130 mph fastfall. The pitch comes in 2004, strikes out the side, wins the game and the series and puts the bastard dems out of business for a veeeerrrry looooong time.

I'm patient and I think 'W' has the vision to realize a HUGE win will be worth waiting for. A quick kill would have been nice, but a certain kill is much more important.

I do think the big media spin of the Gingrich govt. shutdown days can't be repeated today with FR, the internet and cable TV. Oh, sure, they'll try, but it won't be effective. I thought we could breathe easier after the Supreme Court bitch slapped the Florida supremes, but dems are like cockroaches, and you gotta' kill 'em twice.

[FairOpinion]

Good reasoning. You are probably right.

I think the Republicans will make the Dem obstruction of judges an election issue.

I just hope that after 2004 we will have enough R-s in the Senate to override the Democrats on everything, i.e. a filibuster proof majority. Maybe that's the plan -- make the election a national referendum, as Newt did, when he successfully engineered the Republican takeover of the House.

[woodyinscc]

Please make sure I am included, this is a battle for the heart and soul of this country!

Woodyinscc

[Howlin]

PING FOR THE LIVE THREADS!!!!

[Kevin Curry]

Interesting take on apparent "strategery." It is certainly plausible.

[Cold Heat]

I know in advance some Freepers may accuse me of being a Bush-bot.

I believe you are quite right and welcome to the club.

[Cultural Jihad]

Thanks for the bump!

[CPT Clay]

I say do it in Oct this year. Not a lick of work gets done until Miguel and Pryor and Pricilla are on the bench!!! Will probably be a few more fillabustered by then(Pickering and Khul). I will serve my honorable senators turkey dinner through the Thanksgiving break.

[MEG33]

Great post.

[firewalk]

Thanks for the ping Howlin
good post

[MeekOneGOP]

Wow ! Thanks for the great and well-reasoned commments Votelife, and for the Ping, Howlin !!

Please let me know if you want ON or OFF my General Interest ping list!. . .don't be shy.

[Ragtime Cowgirl]

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.

Excellent post. I agree. Thank you for all your efforts, votelife.

The 'enemy press' is our biggest stumbling block. We have voices on the world stage, but far too few....yet.

[AFPhys]

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

This, at least, is not true. President Bush is very aware of the liberal dangers. He simply has chosen a different method (which has in the past been very effective) in dealing with them. His actions in dealing with them now reflect his long view, rather reminiscent of the way he chose Cheney as VP - to govern rather than the more traditional modus of helping him to be elected. There is definitely more to this man (I remind you a Yale MBA and a very successful businessman and governor) than nearly anybody gives him credit for.

[Sacajaweau]

I think you're right also. (Please note that Schummer said they would stop them in Committee). I think the Repubs are looking for a majority only vote on each of these nominees (on the books) even though the rule of 60 is in effect.

Eventually, I believe this will wind up in Supreme Court where ALL of the sitting judges were seated with a majority vote, not a super majority vote.

The filibuster rule should not apply because the Constitution is specific in this case and the Congress cannot make rules which conflict. This is not a legislative matter. It is a separation of Powers matter and the Senate, as it stands, is usurping the Power of the President.

[Sacajaweau]

If EVERY judge who has ever sat on the Supreme Court was only put there via and up and down vote, looking only for a majority, how do the Dems conclude that their filibuster is a legal maneuver??

[pulaskibush]

Free Miguel!

They seemed to bring this up a lot in 2002. It's a good idea, but when next year comes along, we will need to make sure that this becomes a strong issue. I had some homemade fliers a couple of months ago that I put around school and events, but I haven't printed any out for a while.

[votelife]

thank you; I can't wait for the "strategery" to unfold. Not sure I'd want to be a "moderate" Dem running for State in Bush country next year! Of course, I can never imagine myself being a Democrat under the Dashcle/Hillary ideology.

[votelife]

if this issue wound up in the Supreme Court, I'm pretty confident 4 Justices would go lib, 4 would vote Constitutional, and O'Connor, if I had to say, would hold her nose, and side with Bush like she did in 2000.

Monumental case in reality, though not sure how big the issue would seem to the masses.