Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

[Dem] Memos reveal strategy behind judge filibusters [memogate]
WASH TIMES ^ | 5-19-05 | Charles Hurt

Posted on 05/20/2005 6:28:43 AM PDT by OXENinFLA

The "nuclear" showdown that is expected to begin unfolding in the Senate today has its origins in closed-door discussions more than three years ago between key Senate Democrats and outside interest groups as they huddled to plot strategies for blocking President Bush's judicial nominees.

In a Nov. 7, 2001, internal memo to Sen. Richard J. Durbin, who is now the minority whip, an aide described a meeting that the Illinois Democrat had missed between groups opposed to Mr. Bush's nominees and Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, Massachusetts Democrat and member of the Judiciary Committee.

"Based on input from the groups, I would place the appellate nominees in the categories below," the staffer wrote, listing 19 nominees as "good," "bad" or "ugly." Four of the 10 nominees who Democrats have since filibustered were deemed either "bad" or "ugly." None of those deemed "good" by the outside groups was filibustered.

Among those listed as "ugly" was Texas Supreme Court Justice Priscilla Owen, whose nomination will be brought to the floor today by Majority Leader Bill Frist, Tennessee Republican.

(Excerpt) Read more at ...

TOPICS: Extended News; Government; Politics/Elections; US: District of Columbia
KEYWORDS: 109th; 2004memo; collusionmemos; dirtyrats; estradamemo; filibuster; judges; memogate; mirandasrights; naacp; naacpmemo; obstructionistdems; owen; rats; rockefellermemo; senatorkennedy; sorelosers; teddykennedy; tedkennedy; ussenate
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-36 last
To: Cincinatus

But we won't hold it against you!

21 posted on 05/20/2005 6:55:12 AM PDT by Young Werther
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Mister Baredog
It doesn't even matter than the Republicans are winning elections, because the Democrats still call the shots and Republicans are too whimy to stand up to them.

Any "comprimise" will allow the Dems being a substantial minority eliminate the more conservative judges anyway.

22 posted on 05/20/2005 7:03:53 AM PDT by Barney Gumble (All It Takes For Evil to Succeed is for Good Men to Do Nothing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]


It not only shows we must win this fight, but must replace RINO'S in primaries. Too much talking not enough action. If there's a compromise over the weekend I'm only going to be able to support challengers in primaries.

23 posted on 05/20/2005 7:06:31 AM PDT by wmfights (lead,follow,or get out of the way)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: OXENinFLA; Salvation; EggsAckley
It appears that the Democrats are flailing away at ghosts, like they are trying to raise the dead. They are not engaged in genuine negotiations over judicial nominations. They want to avoid real negotiations while they posture with negative sound bite clips for the MSM.

Looming on the horizon like black storm clouds is the issue of new Supreme Court appointments. The countdown to major hostilities has just begun. Senate debates will become more shrill in a month because Justice Berger is due to step down. This great jurist has cancer and deserves to retire with dignity knowing that he has a replacement waiting in the wings. In the meantime, the floor of Senate may become bloody from petty back stabbing and noisy name calling.

On a More Amusing Note

I found this conservative web site today by accident because of a rant on the new Star Wars Epic was featured on Google. The site is called Dummocrats and I was laughing at the many funny images posted on it.

24 posted on 05/20/2005 7:07:42 AM PDT by ex-Texan (Mathew 7:1 through 6)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus

I agree with you, except her hair isn't the same and her face looks different....

25 posted on 05/20/2005 7:08:52 AM PDT by Defiant1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]


Notice also that it's mainly the women and minority nominees that they want to block. They're o.k. putting through "white" men. If the courts become "diverse" and conservative, that will take away the old canard about conservatives only being angry white men.
Know what I mean?

26 posted on 05/20/2005 7:14:01 AM PDT by threeleftsmakearight
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Defiant1

"Again and again in recent years, the filibuster has been the shame of the Senate and the last resort of special-interest groups. Too often, it has enabled a small minority of the Senate to prevent a strong majority from working its will and serving the people." - Ted Kennedy 1975 on changing Senate Rule XXII

27 posted on 05/20/2005 7:16:33 AM PDT by massgopguy (massgopguy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: JesseJane

It's also time, way past time, for the DOJ to ask Sen. Hillary to return the 900+ FBI files, isn't it?

28 posted on 05/20/2005 7:47:19 AM PDT by Waco
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Waco

Absolutely. 2006. Hammer time.

29 posted on 05/20/2005 7:51:48 AM PDT by JesseJane (Close the Borders. No Amnesty.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Jack Bull

Mark Levin is excellent... “The Great-One”.

30 posted on 05/20/2005 7:55:12 AM PDT by johnny7 (Ever wonder what's the 'crust' in 'Ol Crusty'?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: JesseJane

You're right- I'll copy it over there, and thanks.

31 posted on 05/20/2005 8:39:24 AM PDT by backhoe (The 1990's? The Decade of Fraud(s)...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: backhoe

Thanks Backhoe!

Thanks for all your work.. you are amazing.

32 posted on 05/20/2005 8:52:14 AM PDT by JesseJane (Close the Borders. No Amnesty.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

[ "Based on input from the groups, I would place the appellate nominees in the categories below," the staffer wrote, listing 19 nominees as "good," "bad" or "ugly." Four of the 10 nominees who Democrats have since filibustered were deemed either "bad" or "ugly." None of those deemed "good" by the outside groups was filibustered. ]

SO THEN.....
If the democrat party deems them GOOD.?.. They are BAD.. AND their nominations should be reconsidered.?.

Sounds logical to me.. Looks like the democrats are very good at determining WHOS a RINO and WHOs NOT a RINO.. The democrats could be a great boost to developing a new GOOD judiciary.. I say USE them for that purpose until they catch on..

33 posted on 05/20/2005 8:59:42 AM PDT by hosepipe (This Propaganda has been edited to include not a small amount of Hyperbole..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JesseJane

You are right on target, JJ. I suspect, however, this whole thing could have been decided a week back; but, uh, my own common sense is telling me that more mileage has been obtained by bringing to the PUBLIC SQUARE very, very clear attention to what the Dems do as "classic, standard operational BS". And yes, I'd like for the Rockefeller memo to be quite "clearly" covered in "BIG VENUES"; but I suspect.. it has more value in currency as a negotiating tool, rather than an exposure. Better to get these clueless, self-absorbed, losing Democrats on board the starship UNITED STATES! And leave the hitpiece practices to the usual scoundrels, no? Thanks to you I have the Rockefeller memo ready at a moment's notice!

34 posted on 05/20/2005 6:48:36 PM PDT by Alia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Alia
That would be a wonderful scenario, but I've given up on this adminstration.

What's up with Laura Bush all of sudden? Speaking at the WEF, going to Israel, etc. Why does her profile need to be raised? W just escaped a live grenade and he sends his wife on a trip like this? I don't see her running for any office, but heck, maybe she and the hubby are greasing the skids for a place at the Global Government table after this gig is up. Or maybe run for Mayor of Tijuana or something. s

grmblng. . . . . . .

..."Strong's most significant role at the U.N. to-date has been his position as Secretary General of the 1992 U.N. Conference on the Environment and Development, the Rio Earth Summit. In the opening session of the Rio Earth Summit, Strong commented: "The concept of national sovereignty has been an immutable, indeed sacred, principle of international relations. It is a principle which will yield only slowly and reluctantly to the new imperatives of global environmental cooperation. It is simply not feasible for sovereignty to be exercised unilaterally by individual nation states, however powerful. The global community must be assured of environmental security." Interestingly, Strong had initially been blocked from participating in the conference by the U.S. Department of State. When Strong learned of this, however, he persuaded then-President George Bush to overrule the State Department."...

35 posted on 05/22/2005 7:16:25 AM PDT by JesseJane (Close the Borders. No Amnesty.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: JesseJane
I haven't given up at all on this administration. I think they are quite smart, in fact. The WEF is an organization that has been going for quite some time. Whether or not the US approves or not, the WEF is still a vital organization whether I like or not. Were I able to attend, I would also go. I don't think this has to do with the first Lady attempting to "raise her profile", per se. I do know that she as First Lady has projects. She is attempting to help the women in the mid-east. And, in order to do that, she has got to address organizations which have purview over men and women in certain, specific lands. The women alone, in the mid-east, for example, can only do so much with regard to becoming educated, being able to vote; education of the males in those country has to occur too! When these things are set to motion -- it is best and most polite to make such presentations to those who have influence in and over those countries. Laura Bush is doing this.

And, in so doing, better economic strata and potential will occur in these countries.

The way I see it is this, JJ -- in a nutshell: sending Laura over versus sending Maurice Strong. Laura Bush will champion private ownership; Maurice Strong will champion "large governments". Further, he will be most inclined to bring in the usual overregulatory factors which have done NO good to American businesses -- chasing American businesses out of America and to countries where the Fist of Big Government is not as invasive and oppressive - Basically, hobbling businesses before they even have a chance to catch their own breaths.

Lastly, I do not at all think the President would send the First Lady on a mission "like this". From absolutely everything I've studied about the First Lady, she is absolutely a woman of her own mind. She's made clear, to me certainly, what her missions are: Education, uplifting females and males in poorer countries. That these issues also dovetail with Bush Admin policies, certainly doesn't hurt. In fact, it is quite pleasant to see a Presidential couple working so neatly together. Unlike the Clintons, for example, and sad to say. This mission isn't about Laura. Or her support for her husband. She has the power to do certain things and to make some very positive changes in the lives of others. If I suspect anyone at all of encouraging Laura... it would be .. the President's Mother-- Barbara! lol. Yes, I am a huge fan of Barbara Bush. Her mission, her biggest one as first lady? Literacy. Literacy in America and around the world.

Are you aware of the type of education Palestine offers its people, and in particular to Palestinians residing in Israel? I have examples. Much of it is horribly anti-semitic. And being spoonfed to children.

Obviously, IMHO, our US military are not the only ones brave enough to put their lives on the line in order to go the root sources of war and problems in the world. She was heckled in Jordan, I read. She stayed focused.

In re the US and immigration policy.. I've been immersing myself in learning much I never knew before about the Civil War. Often, the US Immigration "discourse" puts me in mind of the Civil War. The problem is that huge, IMHO.

One side yells: "Shut down the borders! That's the only solution".. and I hear this echo in my mind "attack the plantations, free the slaves, that's the only solution to the North/South debate."

But lastly, I have respect for the connections Maurice Strong has; but have not much respect at all for Maurice Strong. Period.

36 posted on 05/22/2005 12:13:18 PM PDT by Alia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-36 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
Topics · Post Article

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