B757300 From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 4114 posts, RR: 30 Reply 3, posted (6 years 2 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 993 times:
If they want to filibuster, let them although I doubt it is going to happen. Kerry is just trying to appease the DUers, DailyKos, and other assorted moonbats.
There are already enough votes to invoke the Constitutional option and put and end to the filibuster of judicial nominees once and for all.
Pope From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 5, posted (6 years 2 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 975 times:
Of course Kerry did. The NYT ordered him to do it this morning.
I hope the GOP really makes him fillabuster. That way he'll have to stand and talk for the whole time. Remember, this is a guy that as the public found out more about him they liked him less. This is the guy who lost to the village idiot. This is the guy whose grades in Yale were lower than Bush's.
This is the guy who blew a 15 point lead in a presidential election.
I say let Kerry speak. Let Kennedy speak. Let the liberal nuts rant and rave. Alito will eventually get a vote (one way or another) and become the next justice of the Supreme Court. Even Robert (white is right) Byrd has come out in favor of Alito.
Let's up the nuclear status to Defcon 3 and spin up the weapons.
Cfalk From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 8, posted (6 years 2 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 969 times:
The party-line vote in the Judicial committee was shameful, as were Feinstein's remarks about her litmus test for Alito. The dems just threw out 200+ years of respectful screening of supreme court justices. For them today, being an experienced and objective judge means nothing - you must be an ideological activist in their mould to qualify as a judge. Shameful...
Dvk From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 1058 posts, RR: 2 Reply 10, posted (6 years 2 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 959 times:
Quoting Cfalk (Reply 8): The dems just threw out 200+ years of respectful screening of supreme court justices
Actually, the radical right Republicans did it first by forcing Harriet Miers to withdraw before she even made it to the committee hearings. The committee members have every right to vote their individual consciences, as do the senate members as a whole. Clarence Thomas was only confirmed 52-48. How many justices have been confirmed 100-0? By your own definition, Roberts must be an "ideological activist" since he was confirmed so easily, and with quite a few Dems voting for him.
I'm not dumb. I just have a command of thoroughly useless information.
FDXMECH From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 3251 posts, RR: 45 Reply 13, posted (6 years 2 weeks 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 937 times:
Quoting Cfalk (Reply 8): The dems just threw out 200+ years of respectful screening of supreme court justices.
These Dems are definitely the gang who couldn't think straight. God forbid if a Dem is elected president with a GOP held senate and a SC seat is open. The future Dem president thanks to these bunch of morons will be hamstrung in a nominee. No more Ginsberg types that's for sure (actually a very good thing IMO but irrelevant). Ginsberg by the way who's far left replaced a conservative justice with a 93 to 3 vote.
How many times have we heard this? There isn't going to be a filabuster, because they need all dems on the judicial commitees of both the house and the Senate to execute a filabuster, which they had 3 defectors so far this morning. There's talk there may be another forthcoming.
Quoting Dvk (Reply 10): and with quite a few Dems voting for him.
3 to be exact at the moment.
Robert C "Sheets" Byrd is one of them voting for confirmation. I forget the other 2.
Halls120 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 16, posted (6 years 2 weeks 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 917 times:
Quoting DL021 (Reply 2): There are several democrats who already said they were going to vote for Alito, and I think that the opportunity for a filibuster is minimal.
It would probably also backfire on the dems, sort of like the way this whole wiretapping issue has done.
Given the number of democratic senators up for election in "red" states this fall, I doubt there will be a filibuster. And if there is one, it will be short-lived.
The democrats are blowing it. The sole ground for not confirming Alito is partisan politics. He is eminently qualified, he has an outstanding judicial record, and no one can say he is NOT qualified.
Kerry and the democrats are idiots on this issue. Turning Alito's confirmation into a partisan litmus test is going to bite them in the rear next time they have a democrat in the White House.
Pope From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 17, posted (6 years 2 weeks 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 911 times:
CNN's 5:30 news report on the "Situation Room" said that up to 70 Senators are expected to vote in favor of cloture. Proving yet again that nobody really cares what Kerry or Kennedy have to say and how out of touch MA is with the rest of the country.
Perhaps they should bring in Dukakis to lead the MA delegation to Congress.
SATX From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 2840 posts, RR: 9 Reply 18, posted (6 years 2 weeks 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 898 times:
Quoting KSYR (Reply 1): Just more whining by the left...
Brought to our attention by more whining from the right?
Quoting KSYR (Reply 1): They need to turn around and face the music- they lost this round. Time for them to stop wasting their time and start focusing on '08.
Nothing in '08 can undo a lifetime appointment to the Supreme Court.
Quoting DL021 (Reply 2): It would probably also backfire on the dems, sort of like the way this whole wiretapping issue has done.
Please give some concrete examples of how exactly another Bush lie 'backfired' on the Democrats? The Democrats may not be getting much traction out of it, but outside of FOX NEWS and Clearchannel who exactly is blaming the Democrats for yet another Bush fuckup?
Quoting B757300 (Reply 3): There are already enough votes to invoke the Constitutional option and put and end to the filibuster of judicial nominees once and for all.
That, folks, is what we call a euphemism.
Quoting Pope (Reply 5): Of course Kerry did. The NYT ordered him to do it this morning.
Where do you come up with this junk?
Quoting Cfalk (Reply 8): The party-line vote in the Judicial committee was shameful
As already stated, it's no more shameful than what happened to Harriot Miers. Also, casting shame on only one side of a party-line vote is just plain hypocritical. The conservatives are better at keeping everyone in a single voting block than the democrats. That's how the whole RINO revenge scheme got started.
Open Season on Consumer Protections is Just Around the Corner...
Jake056 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 291 posts, RR: 0 Reply 20, posted (6 years 2 weeks 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 894 times:
Quoting Jetjack74 (Reply 14): There isn't going to be a filabuster, because they need all dems on the judicial commitees of both the house and the Senate to execute a filabuster, which they had 3 defectors so far this morning.
The House has no role whatsoever in the conduct of the Senate.
Texdravid From United States of America, joined May 2004, 1250 posts, RR: 0 Reply 21, posted (6 years 2 weeks 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 890 times:
While the NY Times did not "order" John Kerry to raise the specter of a filibuster, its editorial this morning was nothing short of shameful. I agree that the NYT has a right to put their views on their editorial page, but that piece this morning was verbatim what Daily Kos would put out, not the "paper of record".
With many Democrats saying either they will vote for Alito or not support a filibuster, I think this is just Kerry posturing to his base.
The leftist base is frustrated with their Democrats in the Senate having no backbone and are actively campaigning for a filibuster. So, a lot of Democrats are in a tough position. If they cater to the base in this Alito nomination, they are going against U.S. public opinion. If they ignore their base, it will cost them politically in terms of re-election chances, committee appointments and cash.
MD-90 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 8182 posts, RR: 16 Reply 23, posted (6 years 2 weeks 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 877 times:
Alito needs to be filibustered. He does not believe in the separation of powers, and despite the Supreme Court ruling in 2002 that candidates for judgeships can answer any questions about how they might rule in a given situation, he refuses to answer valid questions.
If the Constitution is going to have some respite from being undermined by repugnant government flacks, then it is imperative that Alito be filibustered. Anything to keep him off the bench.
He believes that the executive is above the law, and may violate whatever laws he pleases during wartime. Alito would probably approve of another tyrant like Lincoln.
Texdravid From United States of America, joined May 2004, 1250 posts, RR: 0 Reply 24, posted (6 years 2 weeks 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 870 times:
Quoting MD-90 (Reply 23): Alito needs to be filibustered. He does not believe in the separation of powers, and despite the Supreme Court ruling in 2002 that candidates for judgeships can answer any questions about how they might rule in a given situation, he refuses to answer valid questions.
If the Constitution is going to have some respite from being undermined by repugnant government flacks, then it is imperative that Alito be filibustered. Anything to keep him off the bench.
He believes that the executive is above the law, and may violate whatever laws he pleases during wartime. Alito would probably approve of another tyrant like Lincoln.
Please call Teddy Kennedy, Chuck Schumer, and Dianne Feinstein and just tell them how you feel. Write to them, email them, and generally put as much pressure on them to follow Kerry's lead.
I hope you succeed, as it will be so good for your democratic friends. It will come across so well to the American public, maybe as well as the Wellstone tribute did in 2002.
Tort reform now. Throw lawyers in jail later.
25 Jalto27R: It's like the Hartford Convention...with two people. Mike
27 Falcon84: What a thoughtful, insightful, intelligent response. Just what I would expect from someone who wants to wall off the Mexicans and mow them down. Utte
28 StuckinMAF: I never said anything about "mowing them down". And in case you were too short-sighted to understand the concept, the wall will have proper ports-of-
29 StuckinMAF: Oh, and BTW, you misspelled "Filibuster" in your topic title.[Edited 2006-01-27 00:57:27]
30 Falcon84: Oh, gee, how special!! Another "Checkpoint Charlie", eh? I guess it takes one to know one.
31 Jetjack74: Where did I say that, Jake the snake? The House and Senate each have they're own Judicial Committees. He must be confirmed in both the House and Sena
32 AirCop: JetJack you're wrong about the house having a role in confirming any type of court nominee. The president selects and the Senate and only the Senate v
33 Tbar220: Thank you! Somebody finally got it, understood what this is about. This isn't about the Democrats turning this into a partisan issue, no matter how m
34 AerospaceFan: 70? That's a helluva lot! How do they know that? They only need 60 for cloture.
35 Ilikeyyc: In typical politics, you get something for something. Is this threat from the dems legitimate? Is it an attempt to get something from the Reps. in exc
36 Jake056: Sorry, but the U.S. Constitution doesn't agree with you. The President nominates candidates to vacancies on the Supreme Court, and the Senate then ex
37 Halls120: What really scares liberals is the fact that the Supreme Court might once again start interpreting the law in accordance with the Constitution, inste
38 MidnightMike: Not one Democrat has called Alito unqualified, all we keep hearing is what he may or may not do. The Senate is there to vote on his qualifications, a
39 Pope: The most humorous part about this story is that Kerry isn't even in the country. In typical hypocritical fashion he's hobnobbing in Davos with all tho
40 FXramper: GOP has already announced they have secured enough votes, democrats included, to push Alito into the seat...failing to see how this helps DNC. In othe
41 Texdravid: LOL. Kerry has probably the worst political instincts of anyone in the Senate. Thus, not only was the decision dubious, but the manner in which the d
42 SATX: Clinton put on fairly moderate judges, now the Republicans are paying us back with hardliners under the threat of the "nuclear option". Thanks guys.
43 MD-90: You could be eating your words soon if Hillary is elected and she does something you don't like, and the USSC rules in favor of the executive. All of
44 Cptkrell: Good one, Pope (rep 39); VERY good one. One wonders about the relevency of what John Kerry's (or Kennedy's, for that matter) opinions might be. As a m
45 Ctbarnes: Let's just take Kerry's statement for what it is: posturing. The numbers required to make a filibuster stick simply aren't there and the Democratic le
46 Searpqx: Agree 100% - as much as Alito worries me, there are no grounds on his qualification or record not to approve his nomination. There are lots of other
47 Planespotting: Well, at least people who actually count are trying to decide whether or not to confirm this Supreme Court Justice. A few months ago, it was the GOP B
48 AerospaceFan: I don't think that Ruth Bader Ginsburg was moderate, though.
49 Pope: You forget, liberals don't grade by one uniform scale. If a justice supports their cause, they are fair and moderate. If the justice doesn't agree wi
50 Pope: Harry even threw in the towel and has admitted defeat. http://today.reuters.com/news/newsar...TRUKOC_0_US-COURT-ALITO.xml&rpc=22 Kerry loves making hi
51 FDXMECH: A fairly moderate judge? Justice Ginsberg (former General Counsel of the ACLU)is way to the left. Of course relative to your political leaning's, she
52 FDXMECH: Correction: Ginsberg vote: 96 yea - 3 nay - 1 did not vote
53 FDXMECH: If the Dems had half a brain they'd all vote, YEA. But sadly, this isn't the Democratic Party of JFK, Truman and FDR. This is sort of "The Stepford Wi
54 Ctbarnes: The Republican abyss is even deeper, though... Charles, SJ
55 Halls120: Just for once I'd love to see democrats adopt the same position. But sadly, everything is partisan to them.
56 AerospaceFan: I don't think that all liberals think that way. Just the ones that, on this particular issue, are quite unreasonable.
57 ANCFlyer: So much for the John Kerry/Ted Kennedy uber-partisan attempt at a fillibuster. http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/01/30/alito/index.html Alito's support
58 Pope: Kerry and Kennedy are in a race to see which can become more inconsequential. Did anyone see the tan on Kerry when he was speaking on the Senate floor
59 AerospaceFan: At 11:00 a.m. Eastern time, and 8:00 a.m. my time -- that's less than six hours from now -- the Senate will vote on whether to confirm Judge Alito. T
60 AerospaceFan: Correction: I should have written, "less than seven hours from now".
61 StuckinMAF: Once again paranoia and alarm gives way to common sense. I commend those on the left of the aisle who chose to vote to end debate for their seeing thi
Sponsor Message: 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
Printer friendly format 
