Skip to comments.
Senators in Need of a Spine (NY Times Editorial Board Urges Filibuster Alert)
New York Times ^
| January 26, 2006
| The Editors
Posted on 01/25/2006 9:18:51 PM PST by RWR8189
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-86 next last
To: Plutarch
41
posted on
01/25/2006 9:56:24 PM PST
by
Howlin
(Why don't you just report the news, instead of what might be the news? - Donald Rumsfeld 1/25/2006)
To: demkicker
You know, this IS a fight to the death, isn't it?
42
posted on
01/25/2006 9:57:11 PM PST
by
Howlin
(Why don't you just report the news, instead of what might be the news? - Donald Rumsfeld 1/25/2006)
To: Howlin
From what I can tell .. they don't think they have anything to lose now
Their earnings are in the toilet .. their subscriptions are in the toilet and they have been caught red handed on more then one occasion
This is a do or die for them
And they will lose
43
posted on
01/25/2006 9:58:27 PM PST
by
Mo1
(Republicans protect Americans from Terrorists.. Democrats protect Terrorists from Americans)
To: Lancey Howard
. If there was ever a classic case of the spoiled, idiot kid taking over the family business and running it into the ground, the NY Times is it. You have it.
44
posted on
01/25/2006 9:59:05 PM PST
by
RobbyS
( CHIRHO)
To: Mo1
It is a step up from their usual bias.
To: LdSentinal
58 votes so far to break cloture. The Dakota and Arkansas senators are pacing.Sorry to be so uninformed about the process, but what does this mean? That 58 votes (I assume FOR Alito) are enough to break up a filibuster? And what's happening in Dakota and Arkansas?
46
posted on
01/25/2006 10:05:23 PM PST
by
hsalaw
To: hsalaw
If the Democrats do filibuster, it would take 60 votes to break it when not using the NUKE option. All 55 Republican senators are against the filibuster. That doesn't mean all 55 will vote for him, but Alito has over 50 votes for confirmation. With the 55 Republicans against the filibuster, three Democrats have said they, too, would oppose a filibuster: Ben Nelson, Ken Salazar, and Mary Landrieu. This takes us to 58.
North Dakota has two Democratic senators with one up for re-election this year. North Dakota is a heavily Republican state and a vote against Alito would create a backlash. The same for South Dakota senator, Time Johnson (D). South Dakota, too, is a heavily Republican state. Arkansas has two Democratic senators, but it's a state that continues to trend Republican. All five senators have not yet said how they will vote if a potential filibuster came about or on Alito himself.
To: Howlin
"The Editors So nobody had the guts to sign their name to this drivel?"Humorously, though not intentionally, the NY Times had an even worse piece pubished last week about how nation after nation was electing Leftists to lead them, citing such "powerhouses" as Boliva and Venezuela...ignoring that Germany just kicked out Schroeder in favor or Merkel.
And then this week the Canucks kicked out lefty Martin in favor of righteous Harper. Some trend!
This particular editorial above, is more pale than the "leftward" trend article...but also more accurate in the sense that the Editors actually got one point right: the Dems are being spineless by not filibustering Judge Alito.
The remaining 18 Blue States are essentially unrepresented in Washington right now...because the Dems are laying low (well, except for their daily episode of crying "Wolf!" over some newly imagined "scandal") until the November elections.
48
posted on
01/25/2006 10:15:10 PM PST
by
Southack
(Media Bias means that Castro won't be punished for Cuban war crimes against Black Angolans in Africa)
To: LdSentinal
Thanks very much for the helpful information. I was confused because I thought that Gang of 14 thing took the filibuster option off the table. Guess I was wrong.
49
posted on
01/25/2006 10:16:56 PM PST
by
hsalaw
To: Howlin
These people are actively -- and in plain view -- working to unseat a sitting president for no other reason than the fact that they don't agree with him.I agree with you but I don't know what the force is behind it all. This isn't traditional party politics. The only comfort I take is knowing when they are screaming the loudest and making the most outrageous claims they are very close to another defeat or the President is closing in on a victory that sets their agenda back many, many years.
50
posted on
01/25/2006 10:17:42 PM PST
by
Dolphy
To: Paleo Conservative
51
posted on
01/25/2006 10:20:32 PM PST
by
JennysCool
(Non-Y2K-Compliant)
To: Lancey Howard
But it doesn't know it's a laughingstock. It's the George Galloway of journalism.
52
posted on
01/25/2006 10:20:52 PM PST
by
Cyclopean Squid
(Moderates do not make history)
To: RWR8189
Gotta hand it to the Times - no beating around the bush for their editorial board - they came out with the big lie right in the first sentence, no need to read any further...
53
posted on
01/25/2006 10:22:03 PM PST
by
Zeppo
To: Dolphy
This isn't traditional party politics.This isn't something you and I have seen in our lifetimes.
54
posted on
01/25/2006 10:23:29 PM PST
by
Howlin
(Why don't you just report the news, instead of what might be the news? - Donald Rumsfeld 1/25/2006)
To: Southack
The remaining 18 Blue States are essentially unrepresented in Washington right now...because the Dems are laying low (well, except for their daily episode of crying "Wolf!" over some newly imagined "scandal") until the November elections. How do you mean laying low? Watch how they work every issue into their theme of an unconstrained executive branch that has little concern for the most vulnerable (almost a direct quote from Obama on Alito). They are planting election theme seeds but if the past is any guide, the President will have moved the garden when they come to check their crops.
55
posted on
01/25/2006 10:24:30 PM PST
by
Dolphy
To: jwalsh07
What the hell happened to "comity"?By all appearances, nurtured in the womb, and aborted by the left.
56
posted on
01/25/2006 10:27:15 PM PST
by
BigSkyFreeper
(Proud to be a cotton-pickin' Republican on the GOP Plantation)
To: Mo1
Just when you thought they couldn't go any lower, that steaming pile just gets higher and unmanageable.
57
posted on
01/25/2006 10:28:08 PM PST
by
BigSkyFreeper
(Proud to be a cotton-pickin' Republican on the GOP Plantation)
To: Dolphy
"How do you mean laying low?"No filibuster. No policy proposals.
Dems are laying low between now and the November elections...save for their regularly scheduled daily cries of "Wolf!" in regards to whatever "scandal" they are trying to sell at the moment.
58
posted on
01/25/2006 10:28:34 PM PST
by
Southack
(Media Bias means that Castro won't be punished for Cuban war crimes against Black Angolans in Africa)
To: Dolphy
I agree with you but I don't know what the force is behind it all. This isn't traditional party politics. You're right, it's not traditional party politics
As for the force ... Can you say Big Time $$$$ Lobbyist ?
59
posted on
01/25/2006 10:31:52 PM PST
by
Mo1
(Republicans protect Americans from Terrorists.. Democrats protect Terrorists from Americans)
To: BigSkyFreeper
oh .. that steaming pile will get even higher
This is a do or die for them
60
posted on
01/25/2006 10:34:29 PM PST
by
Mo1
(Republicans protect Americans from Terrorists.. Democrats protect Terrorists from Americans)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-86 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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson