Republican majority as victims

San Diego Union-Tribune ^ | 21 April 2005 | RUBEN NAVARRETTE JR.

[Lando Lincoln]

Lando

[rocksblues]

Republicans should avoid emulating their opponents.

Nuff Said!

[Torie]

But that doesn't mean Republicans should resort to the so-called "nuclear option" of changing Senate rules to make it easier for them to break through judicial filibusters. If Republicans do that, they'll look desperate and out of arguments

No just out of votes, given the Dem's willingness to use filibusters frequently to stop nominees. This is all about getting Bush nominees for SCOTUS through. This is about power, not argument. The writer misses the point.

[guitarist]

I used to like Ruben. Seems he's turning into a hack. Delay and the Republicans are merely pointing out how OUTRAGEOUS the courts--and their supporters, the Democrats--are. It's that simple.

[CHARLITE]

"I used to like Ruben. Seems he's turning into a hack. Delay and the Republicans are merely pointing out how OUTRAGEOUS the courts--and their supporters, the Democrats--are. It's that simple."

Exactly. Ruben has become ZOTABLE! ZOT to him!

I also like Torie's brief, concise comment: "The writer misses the point."

.......and that's "the point." Well said, guitarist and Torie!

Thanks for your comments!

Char :)

[CyberAnt]

That's fine - but you missed the point he made that we look like whiners just because we want to change a senate rule.

He's full of it - and I just sent him an email and told him. It's about the Constitution - the senate rule overrides the Constitution .. that's why we're changing it back.

[Just A Nobody]

Didn't Republicans filibuster Clinton's nominees as well -

No. Do your homework, Newbie.

[stands2reason]

Welcome to FR.

Didn't Republicans filibuster Clinton's nominees as well - Or does history get revised on this site? It seems that this article is suggesting that to filibuster is to express weakness, sooooo what does this say about the Republicans in the 90's??

Seriously, isn't it really all about absolute power, and assuring that there isn't?

[stands2reason]

Let me try that again: Didn't Republicans filibuster Clinton's nominees as well - Or does history get revised on this site? It seems that this article is suggesting that to filibuster is to express weakness, sooooo what does this say about the Republicans in the 90's??

Seriously, isn't it really all about absolute power, and assuring that there isn't?

[stands2reason]

You're an interesting poster. Anti-Repubican, and pro-Hillary.

[MeekOneGOP]

Bye, Tallulah.

"He/she/it's dead, Jim!"

[MeekOneGOP]

Hmmm. Worth watching.

[tiamat]

That one was sliding around another thread early this morning.

I think it's dead now.

Must be Spring.

Got trolls popping out all over like mushrooms!

[Darksheare]

I know where they got their handle from.
Song by Tori Amos called "Tallulah" off of the "Boys for Pele" album.
I probably know them under a different handle from the old Tori Amos chat room.

[RepublicMan4U]

"You're an interesting poster. Anti-Repubican, and pro-Hillary."

Am I missing something? I don't know anything about the poster you're responding to, but where do you get pro-Hillary from his comment? Or are you just insulting him or her?

[RepublicMan4U]

What was their full comment? So many people get immediately banned on this site, and I am often left wondering why. I wish mods would leave non-profane controversial comments up, if only to satiate my curiosity as to why they were banned.