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

Skip to comments.

Time to Retire the Filibuster [NYT Editorial 1-1-95] (A must read)
US Congressional Record ^ | 1-1-1995 | ??

Posted on 04/27/2005 5:16:17 PM PDT by OXENinFLA

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-96 next last
I hope y'all find this as funny as I do.

--------------

Note to MODS: I know we're supposed to excerpt the NYT but this is from the Congressional Record and is public domain.

1 posted on 04/27/2005 5:16:21 PM PDT by OXENinFLA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Mo1; Howlin; Peach; BeforeISleep; kimmie7; 4integrity; BigSkyFreeper; RandallFlagg; ...
PING...
2 posted on 04/27/2005 5:17:07 PM PDT by OXENinFLA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: OXENinFLA
Somebody ping the New York Times.

Oh....wait.

3 posted on 04/27/2005 5:19:21 PM PDT by Texas Eagle (If it wasn't for double-standards, Liberals would have no standards at all)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: OXENinFLA
Has the Slimes recently opined about the filibuster?
4 posted on 04/27/2005 5:19:33 PM PDT by CaptainK
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: OXENinFLA

Good find! You should send it on to Rush and Hannity.


5 posted on 04/27/2005 5:19:47 PM PDT by MamaLucci (Mutually assured destruction STILL keeps the Clinton administration criminals out of jail.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: OXENinFLA

6 posted on 04/27/2005 5:20:45 PM PDT by Petronski (Pope Benedict XVI: A German Shepherd on the Throne of Peter)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CaptainK

Yeah looks like it.


http://www.progressforamerica.com/1101-361.1101-031005A.html

Filibusters, Then and Now

03/10/2005

Senator John Cornyn
New York Times

"The Senate on the Brink" (editorial, March 6) supports the "historic role of the filibuster," which is a curious position for a newspaper that 10 years ago said filibusters were "the tool of the sore loser" and should be eliminated ("Time to Retire the Filibuster," editorial, Jan. 1, 1995).

Federal judicial appointments have certainly been controversial, but surely all Americans can agree that the rules for confirming judges should be the same regardless of which party has a majority.

Now you praise the filibuster as a "time-honored Senate procedure." In 1995, when Bill Clinton was president, you called it "an archaic rule that frustrates democracy and serves no useful purpose."

You disparage the Republicans' view that 51 votes should be enough for judicial confirmation. Yet the 51-vote rule is a consistent Senate tradition. By calling for an end to filibusters, the Senate is simply contemplating restoring its traditions by traditional methods you disparage as "nuclear," even though they were once endorsed by such leading Democrats as Senators Edward M. Kennedy, Charles E. Schumer and Robert C. Byrd.


7 posted on 04/27/2005 5:21:26 PM PDT by OXENinFLA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: OXENinFLA

My head is spinning and I feel faint. Even MY sizable brain is overloaded and cannot process the overdose of Mega-Hypocrisy and massive deceit from the NY Times and the democrats.


8 posted on 04/27/2005 5:22:01 PM PDT by FormerACLUmember (Honoring Saint Jude's assistance every day.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: OXENinFLA
The filibuster has become the tool of the sore loser...

That's my favorite part of this editorial.

9 posted on 04/27/2005 5:22:23 PM PDT by 68skylark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: OXENinFLA
Absolutely perfect
10 posted on 04/27/2005 5:23:43 PM PDT by colonialhk (sooprize sooprize sooprize)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: OXENinFLA
the filibuster has become the tool of the sore loser

Worth repeating

11 posted on 04/27/2005 5:24:35 PM PDT by jwalburg (If I have not seen as far as others, it is because of the giants standing on my shoulders.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Thud

ping


12 posted on 04/27/2005 5:24:45 PM PDT by Dark Wing
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: OXENinFLA

C-SPAN Thursday
7-8 a.m. Washington Journal
Viewer phone calls and e-mails



Submit Guest Questions
Ask Washington Journal guests a question

Call-In Numbers
Support Pres. Bush:
(202) 737-0001
Support Democrats:
(202) 737-0002
Support Others:
(202) 628-0205
Email:
journal@c-span.org


13 posted on 04/27/2005 5:24:57 PM PDT by Texas Eagle (If it wasn't for double-standards, Liberals would have no standards at all)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: OXENinFLA

It's like deja vue all over again....


14 posted on 04/27/2005 5:25:51 PM PDT by b4its2late (Junk is something you've kept for years and throw away three weeks before you need it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 68skylark

I wish Mitch McConnell would read this in the Senate tomorrow--

Or, better yet, have Bush read it tomorrow night before his press conference-----LOL


15 posted on 04/27/2005 5:27:09 PM PDT by Txsleuth (Mark Levin for Supreme Court Justice!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: OXENinFLA

What have we proved? That the NYT are partisan hacks? Like we haven't known all along!


16 posted on 04/27/2005 5:27:28 PM PDT by The Great Yazoo ("Happy is the boy who discovers the bent of his life-work during childhood." Sven Hedin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: OXENinFLA

Lucy ya got some splanin to do! Democrats doing what Democrats to, take every side of an issue.


17 posted on 04/27/2005 5:27:44 PM PDT by agincourt1415 (4 More Years of NEW SHERIFF IN TOWN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MamaLucci
I came across it while looking into THIS. Be sure to scroll down a few posts to read the amendment.
18 posted on 04/27/2005 5:29:18 PM PDT by OXENinFLA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: OXENinFLA

OUTSTANDING POST.

Cheers,

knews hound


19 posted on 04/27/2005 5:30:27 PM PDT by knews_hound (Out of the NIC ,into the Router, out to the Cloud....Nothing but 'Net)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Txsleuth

Bookmarked.

Here's an idea. Delete the party reference and the names of the senators involved. Post it around libs as a New York Times editorial and see what they say.

Then spring the trap on them - that it was 10 years ago when Democrats wanted to use the nuclear option (or a variation of it).

I like Senator Harkin's proposal and I think we need to endorse it as "Senator Harkin's proposal", thus claiming "bi-partisan support" for the idea. We can even proclaim it a "compromise" from the "nuclear option". Yeah, I love it!


20 posted on 04/27/2005 5:31:22 PM PDT by Tall_Texan (If you can think 180-degrees apart from reality, you might be a Democrat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-96 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