Posted on 07/02/2006 12:05:44 AM PDT by YaYa123
The fight for control of the House is getting more ink than the battle for control of the Senate, but several recent shifts in individual Senate races merit attention. All year, talk about the Democrats' chances of taking the Senate has focused on the five most endangered Republican incumbents.
They are, roughly in order of vulnerability, Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania, Conrad Burns of Montana, Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island, Mike DeWine of Ohio, and Jim Talent of Missouri. The discussions then turn to the second tier of vulnerable Republicans, speculating whether Democrats can perhaps pick up a sixth seat (the most likely prospect is the open seat in Tennessee that Majority Leader Bill Frist is vacating) and whether they will be able to hold on to all of their own Senate seats. The open seat in Minnesota and Maria Cantwell's seat in Washington state are the Democrats' biggest vulnerabilities
(Excerpt) Read more at realclearpolitics.com ...
No.
Not going to vote for RINOs anymore!
How serious am I about that?
Just as serious as i said years back, when i said I would never again vote for any democrat for any office, under any conditions, no matter who it was or what the office was.
RINO's are just as bad for the programs I support, as libs. Sometimes worse. When they want to show how cooperative they are, MY programs are always the first to go.
Ok, so how many appellate judges are you talking about? 10? 50? 100? More? Are you suggesting that a democrat controlled senate would prevent all nominees from being confirmed? a percentage? I do understand that a lap-dog-gop judiciary committee rubber stamps nearly everyone who is nominated thus making our president's job easier - but I would argue that judges would still be confirmed regardless of which party is in the majority.
Show trials? Be serious. With the Dems running the Senate AS committee, they would have the JCS up every week defending a new "atrocity."
If no "atrocities" have been committed, there is nothing to fear, correct? Besides, as I speculated, any activity that prevents the congress from spending and passing bad bills is a win for US. (we can't count on gw to veto anything)
Don't kid yourself about "commander in chief." A President is only as powerful in wartime as his support. Ask LBJ.
I'm not touching that one - being an effective C-I-C is about being a strong and effective leader. I really don't think a comparison to johnson fits. I may be naive, but I'd rather be naive than be chicken little.
Very fluid situation with the Senate races. I don't buy into that many seats switching hands to the Dems, at least not AZ, TN, OH, or MO. PA, MT, and RI are legitimate would-be losses, but they aren't close to getting a net of six seats. Factoring in the increased number of competitive Dem seats (MN, NE, WA, MD, NJ, MI), they should be hoping to gain a couple of seats at best.
We tried, but he won the primary.
Next time.
Washington State is starting to get a track record of "finding" votes for democrats after they have apparently lost in close races. Whomever goes up against Cantvotewell had better have a comfortable lead....
As for atrocities, you really, really are naive. The Dems do NOT NEED real crimes to have show trials. They hate the WoT, they hate the military and they won't let anything like evidence get in the way of completely obstructing any progress we might make in the war. Yes, there will be show trials. Rumsfeld would be forced out. Regardless of what the House would do on illegals, the Senate would force an amnesty.
I'm no chicken little, and if you'd been around here for the last TEN YEARS you'd know I'm the most clear-eyed realist on the board, and I'm telling you that if you think there is no genuine detrimental impact of a Dem senate, you are pure and simply a fool.
Well, that's an interesting way to look at it but remember, when you don't vote for the Republican it is a vote for the RAT.
The place to defeat RINOs is in the primary.
Not really. Most RINOs (e.g. Specter, Collins, et al.) will still vote to support conservative judge nominees on the basis that the President's election gives him the right and duty to appoint.
If one considers tax policy to be a social issue, most RINOs will eschew the notion of government being the source of welfare and income for the underclass.
Tell that to Bush 1.
I think you're wrong twice.
I don't think tax policy is a social issue. I think it's fiscal, and i think it is one of the large watershed distinctions between country-club conservatives and social conservatives.
I also don't think that the two Senators you mention are on board with judicial nominations -- Collins and Specter. I know that they DID vote to confirm the two most recent Justices. But I REMEMBER lots of other nominees, and I REMEMBER Specter's opposition -- Bork is the classic, but there's others.
I also think that RINO support of Specter, while leaving Santorum out to dry, is classic.
RINOs are Just as bad as libs when it comes to social conservatives.
Interesting thread. Thanks to all speculators, especially the optimistic ones. :)
I really don't follow the judicial system very closely at all. There are a total of 179 appellate court judges, each has a lifetime appointment. I doubt that 100 vacancies would occur in 2 years. If we include ALL judges at the federal level only then would it be plausible that 100 vacancies could occur.
NONE got through when the Dems held the 1-vote majority between 2000 and 2002.
The actual figures for 01/2001 - 12/2002 showed a total of 131 federal nominations and 100 confirmations. http://www.usdoj.gov/olp/judicialnominations107.htm
The Dems do NOT NEED real crimes to have show trials. They hate the WoT, they hate the military and they won't let anything like evidence get in the way of completely obstructing any progress we might make in the war.
This is pure speculation. You are certainly welcome to this opinion. I just do not see this as being probable.
Rumsfeld would be forced out. Regardless of what the House would do on illegals, the Senate would force an amnesty.
Doesn't rumsfeld serve at the pleasure of the president? Does the senate have the legal authority to replace cabinet members? I don't believe so. As for the amnesty issue, that is the administration's position now and the current gop-controlled senate is forwarding that agenda as well. - I see no difference on that matter.
you are pure and simply a fool.
Of course you'd say that. From a partisan political perspective, every two years the same worn-out premise is rolled out, "Vote the straight party ticket at all levels or the evil party will ruin everything." If anyone threatens the partisan approach they must be ignorant, a fool, or both. I don't believe that.
You are probably correct.
And party line, smartyline, it has to do with reality. BTW, I think I said in the original appellate and other federal judges, but play your silly numbers games.
And, no, Chuck Schumer and Ted Kennedy do not need a reason---none at all---to emasculate the War on Terror. It's sad and frightening that you would think otherwise.
Games? No, just facts.
You stated that not a single judge was confirmed, I simply pointed out that your source was obviously incorrect.
I'm quite sure that this was your first mistake ever, but don't get defensive when you're proven wrong it happens to everyone.
*ROFL*
Sorry I missed this. I see from your profile that you write books. So that explains why you believe that you are such an authority. After all you've had a pretty good record.........
So what I see as "probable" is, well, 100% more likely than what you entertain.
Believe anything you wish! It's a great country, everyone believes as they see fit.
In the end, it's just you or me standing alone in the voting booth, pondering whether or not our lone vote really matters............................and pondering if we are willing to apply that clothes pin once again to our nose and pull the lever for a weak candidate whose only virtue seems to be that there is an "r" or a "d" next to their name.
Go Flyers
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.