Skip to comments.GOP: CAN WE PLEASE DO IT LIKE GINSBURG? [Byron York]
Posted on 07/21/2005 2:56:40 PM PDT by doug from upland
GOP: CAN WE PLEASE DO IT LIKE GINSBURG? [Byron York]
Look for Republicans to point to the confirmations of Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer as models of the process that should be employed in the effort to replace Sandra Day O'Connor. Both Ginsburg and Breyer were nominated and confirmed at a time (1993-1994) in which the president's party -- Democrats -- also controlled the Senate. And both were given relatively easy passage through the Senate because the minority party -- Republicans -- cooperated with Democrats to ensure a quick confirmation. Ginsburg was nominated on June 14, 1993 and confirmed by the Senate on August 3, 1993. Breyer was nominated on May 13, 1994 and confirmed on July 29, 1994.
They moved with such speed because Republicans, in particular Sen. Orrin Hatch, the ranking GOP member on the Senate Judiciary Committee at the time, declined to challenge their records. Ginsburg, in particular, received something of a bye from Republicans despite her former position as general counsel of the American Civil Liberties Union; had they chosen to, Republicans could have hung every extreme ACLU position around Ginsburg's neck. Instead, "Sen. Hatch put an orderly and fair process above scoring political points," says one high-ranking staffer involved at the time. "It ensured that the Senate's conduct of the hearings was constructive rather than divisive."
Republicans also chose not to oppose Ginsburg even though she refused to answer dozens of questions during her confirmation hearings. Among others, she declined to give her views on Roe v. Wade, on the Second Amendment, on the death penalty, on the Voting Rights Act, on race-based congressional redistricting, and on adoption rights for gay couples, among many other issues. At one point in her hearings, Republican Sen. Strom Thurmond told her, "In preparing these questions or any others I may propound during the hearings, if you feel they are inappropriate to answer, will you speak out and say so." On another occasion, Thurmond said, "I will not press you to answer any that you feel are inappropriate."
Not surprisingly, Democrats wholeheartedly agreed. Then-chairman Sen. Joseph Biden told Ginsburg, "You not only have a right to choose what you will answer and not answer, but in my view you should not answer a question of what your view will be on an issue that clearly is going to come before the court in 50 forms probably, over your tenure on the court."
Of course, Republicans today realize that Democrats, now the minority party, will never extend to a Bush nominee the sort of treatment the GOP gave Ginsburg in 1993. Nevertheless, they will tell the story over and over, in hopes that someone will listen.
"How could he have given Ginsberg a pass. He did this country a grave disservice."
Keep in mind the Dims had a 57-43 majority in 1993 and the only way the nomination could have been stopped would have been by filibuster, which the dims probably would have nuked then. Dang, now that I think about it, maybe if the Pubs filibustered back then, the Dims would not have had the filibuster now.
It would turn off some who might vote for them, including many of the linguini Reps.
Better yet, have a voice recording of her own voice saying the words, that he can play at a touch of a button
Roberts should not read them, but GOP senators had better do it. They should make a chart like Barbara Boxer does. :)
It's being widely publicized -- no excuse for any Republican senator (even those with short memories) to be unaware of it.
Waltzed through because Republicans equate lack of character/guts the "high road".
Thought-provoking points, but I can't imagine the Pubbies filibustering. EVER.
They should have just flushed Satan-Ginsburg's nomination down the toilet.
I mean come on -- 'General Counsel' for ACLU?? Does a SC nominee get any more liberal than that??
Yes, he did.......and to add insult to injury, he incessantly brags
about how he
got rolled by "worked with" the democrats.
According to Sandy Berger (Robert's former law partner), Roberts is the smartest person in every room.
The same principal applies then as now. The disgraced impeached scumbag president had the right to get his leftist judge. Our president has the right to get his conservative judge. The lesson is that we had better keep winning elections until we can get a 9-0 court.
You will not believe the story on Moyers. Seems when he was in the White House (LBJ) he sent out a memo asking the FBI to hunt down dirt on the Goldwater campaign staff regarding homosexuality.
Moyers claimed it was not true, so the guy investigating it said that he would investigate and when he was proven he did not send the memo he would clear his name Moyers backed off his claim and is said to have said something like, "I was so young, how would my wife understand.
BTW, this is not an active case.
Oh man. I want to know more about this.
Believe it or not, I am helping my brother's and his company at an event in Austin in late September. Moyers and Ivins are featured speakers. It will be difficult, but I have promised to behave. But I wouldn't be beyond confronting him after hours.
I was stunned.
If you missed his show, they still have yesterdays grapevine up, but they are sure to change it before the end of the night.
Doug from the sounds of his response he knew his goose was cooked and was just about begging for the story not to get out.
I don't have cable because I really hardly ever watch television.
LOL! You're way too generous.
75/76 = 0.986842105 ...seems about right.
OK, best I can suggest is that watch for the grapevine story on fox news cable.
sorry, fox news web site.
That was a Democrat president nominating far left wing justices. Different rules apply.