Posted on 05/06/2009 11:00:39 AM PDT by Free ThinkerNY
WASHINGTON (AP) - The top Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee says he's inclined against using a filibuster to block President Barack Obama's nominee to succeed retiring Supreme Court Justice David Souter.
Sen. Jeff Sessions of Alabama said a deal four yours ago that averted filibusters against some of former President George W. Bush's judicial nominees established a "standard" that shouldn't be discarded except in unusual circumstances. Sessions, however, didn't entirely rule out a filibuster.
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
Generally, I’m against them too. And one wouldn’t be necessary if the president appoints someone who’s dedicated to the law instead of feelings.
I wouldn't have us behave any other way, but I sure do wish our guys would get some fire in the belly & start calling a spade a spade.
If they had perhaps we wouldn't have a past president of the ALCU on the highest court in the land today.
God only knows what kind of loonie Obama will nominate.
Go along and try to get along - this strategy didn't work for the Jews in WWII and won't work with 0bama.
Hit back, and hit hard!
In principle, minority blocking of executive nominations is clearly wrong. BUT, another principle is to play by the same rules your opponent says are the correct rules. I would use the same arguments the DEMs use to justify minority obstruction; and I would engage in minority obstruction on each and every pretense. Fabricate issues, just like they do. Make them work for their porridge.
No reason to make any excuses. These suckos in CONgrress will ALWAYS permit the liberal agenda to move as a favor to the elites.
So, of course, everything will be the fault of the Republicans.
Winning strategy.
even against that fat Latina broad and her flippant remarks about legislating from the bench?
1) When have the Democrats ever honored any gentleman's agreement with Republicans?
2) Is Sen. Sessions saying that the handshake between and among politicians is more important that the lives of millions of unborn?
I hope this http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2245443/posts doesn’t play a roll in Sen. Sessions’ decision to not filibuster.
I'll roll for a piece of pork, trained elephant.
He just gave Obama a free ride, unless all 12 of the DINO’s all stick together. He just has to pick up three of them or pick up the two turncoat sisters (what do they think of the Maine gay marriage law, that’s what I want to hear) and he can name three or more justices during his term.
As a resident of the state of Alabama, I am profoundly disappointed in my senator, and I will tell him so. He does not realize that we are in a political war, and cooperation with the enemy is never a good idea. This get along, go along policy is another term for surrender.
Ummm, can someone remind him that picking a Supreme Court justice is not an everyday occurrence? If anything deserves a filibuster, it’s a crummy SC pick.
He's just talking now. Hold your fire until he starts advocating specific action relating to a nominee. If he uses every pretext as grounds for opposition, and says stuff like "I don't like being in opposition, but ...", then he's a winner.
Wait. We don’t even know who the far-left nominee will be yet. Don’t decide on filibuster until you have all the facts. Don’t forget that Justice Alito was filibustered by one Senator 0bama several years ago.
“Duh”...last I checked we don’t have the votes to filibuster what with all the RINO pubbies. Take a look at all the pubbies that supported Sebellius.
Bork ‘em, Bork ‘em and then Bork ‘em again!
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.