Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Democrats to maintain filibusters on Bush nominees
Washington Times ^ | Wednesday, March 2, 2005 | By Charles Hurt

Posted on 03/02/2005 2:39:00 AM PST by JohnHuang2

THE WASHINGTON TIMES

Democrats made plain yesterday their intention to continue their filibusters against President Bush's judicial nominations -- all but assuring a dramatic parliamentary duel over long-standing Senate practice. Their intentions became clear after the Senate Judiciary Committee held a new hearing yesterday morning for William G. Myers, whose nomination to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals was filibustered last year. Republicans picked Mr. Myers for the first hearing because they thought he was the most likely to garner the 60 votes needed to break through a Democratic filibuster.

(Excerpt) Read more at washtimes.com ...


TOPICS: Front Page News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: judicialnominees; obstructionistdems
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-27 next last

1 posted on 03/02/2005 2:39:01 AM PST by JohnHuang2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2

bump for later read


2 posted on 03/02/2005 2:39:55 AM PST by Former Proud Canadian (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2

Okay, Repubs. . .stop talking about it; and DO something!


3 posted on 03/02/2005 2:41:29 AM PST by cricket
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
We are now at an impasse in the Senate over this issue. Republicans need to exercise the nuclear option or do sometime just as dramatic to place the blame for this where it belongs. Trying to preserve non-existent collegiality is a mistake. If Specter can't get the job done send him to the showers...
4 posted on 03/02/2005 2:48:42 AM PST by RedEyeJack
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2; 7.62 x 51mm
dramatic parliamentary duel

aaah, sounds so european... ping

5 posted on 03/02/2005 2:49:11 AM PST by sure_fine (*not one to over kill the thought process*)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sure_fine

Sigh.. Where is Preston Brooks now that we really need him. ;)


6 posted on 03/02/2005 2:52:07 AM PST by flying Elvis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2

I guess the dims really are dim. Lets' see who is up for a Republican pick-up in 2006.


7 posted on 03/02/2005 3:11:05 AM PST by Shery (S. H. in APOland)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2

If the Democrats work at it hard enough, I'm sure they could get a USSC ruling that only Democrat presidents can appoint judges. It's somewhere in the 8th ammendment I'm certain.


8 posted on 03/02/2005 3:18:00 AM PST by PogySailor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
Santorum would sure galvanize the Pubbies here in PA. if he come out as strong against this treachery by the dims as much as he does against abortion.
Partner Santorum and Specter against the dims and I think PA. could/would go red next time.
9 posted on 03/02/2005 3:38:57 AM PST by knarf (A place where anyone can learn anything ... especially that which promotes clear thinking.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RedEyeJack
There is no point in supporting a political party if that party will not take charge when it has achieved a majority.

As far as I am concerned, Senate Republicans are wimps and cowards until they stand up and fight completely for victory over this judicial blackmail.

10 posted on 03/02/2005 3:41:25 AM PST by NoControllingLegalAuthority
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2

Advice and Consent is the power to advise the President, ratify treaties and confirm nominations. Article 2 of the Constitution gives this power exclusively to the Senate.

Filibusters are contrary to "Advice and Consent" because the purpose is to create gridlock by delaying any adivce or consent.

The "Nuclear Option" of preventing filibusters in situations requiring "Advice and Consent" is not really a drastic change. It is a return to our roots and how confirmations should be handled.

In my view, the real "Nuclear card" was played when the first filibuster was placed on a judicial nominee. It's now time to disarm the Senate Democrats and end the gridlock on nominees.


11 posted on 03/02/2005 4:39:31 AM PST by Tai_Chung
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NoControllingLegalAuthority

"There is no point in supporting a political party if that party will not take charge when it has achieved a majority"

I'm convinced it's time for Senator Frist to spend a couple weeks attending an NCO leadership course. After this excellent training he can come back and attack his duties with proper vigor and spine.

Right now his leadership style is that of an "Affiliator" and it's not getting the job done.


12 posted on 03/02/2005 4:51:56 AM PST by Wristpin ( Varitek says to A-Rod: "We don't throw at .260 hitters.....")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
This is where the tire meets the road.

The mere fact that there are so many here (including me) that doubt that the Republican leaders will stand up to the Dems is disturbing.

If Frist doesn't back up his words with action, it's going to be a major blow to the GOP.

13 posted on 03/02/2005 5:00:05 AM PST by airborne (Dear Lord, please be with my family in Iraq. Keep them close to You and safely in Your arms.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2

I'm so frigging sick of this nonsense. When will the Republican Leadership in the Senate grow a set and move these nominations forward for a simple majority vote? This issue has been going on since 2001, so when in the heck are they going to make a decision on what they will do? These are however the same folks that voted Arlen Sphincter as the Chair of the JC over the protests of their base.


14 posted on 03/02/2005 5:00:43 AM PST by conservativecorner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: airborne

Is it a requirement for GOP Senators to have their spines removed when elected? Pathetic.


15 posted on 03/02/2005 5:04:14 AM PST by go-ken-go
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2

..."Democrats say using the "nuclear option" would end the Senate tradition of collegiality and paralyze the chamber with partisanship"

The only time there has ever been "collegiality" in the Senate is when the Rep's have given the Democrats what they want. This is a fiction.

Rep's - as usual - have a problem with language. They should never have named this option the "nuclear option." They should have called it the "Senate Rules Change Option."

I think Frist will do it.


16 posted on 03/02/2005 5:06:42 AM PST by CR
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: go-ken-go
Is it a requirement for GOP Senators to have their spines removed when elected?

We are going to get an answer to that question soon!

17 posted on 03/02/2005 5:07:58 AM PST by airborne (Dear Lord, please be with my family in Iraq. Keep them close to You and safely in Your arms.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: go-ken-go

According to Fox news last night, Republicans said they were concerned with the sheet's (Byrd) speech because he would not have said what he did without a lot of Dem's backing.
As the comedian (his name slips me right now) says, "Here's your sign." There going to back down!


18 posted on 03/02/2005 5:13:47 AM PST by Wilum (Never loaded a nuke I didn't like)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
Democrats say using the "nuclear option" would end the Senate tradition of collegiality and paralyze the chamber with partisanship.

No, Democrats have already "paralyzed" the Senate with their totally unreasonable approach to not even allow a vote on the nominees using the "non-nuclear" rules (and the Republicans have let the Democrats get away with this waaaay too long already).

Mr. Specter also hoped to woo support from Sen. Charles E. Schumer of New York...

Specter must be on crack to believe he would get support from the dispicable Schumer.

19 posted on 03/02/2005 5:17:48 AM PST by libertylover (Being liberal means never being concerned about the truth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: go-ken-go

IMO, Republicans are more concerned about what's said of them in the editorial pages of the Washington Post or New York Times. Plus they are very worried about not being on the "A" list when considered for invitations to liberal cocktail parties in DC.


20 posted on 03/02/2005 5:30:13 AM PST by sergeantdave (Smart growth is Marxist insects agitating for a collective hive.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-27 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson