LIVE THREAD: Estrada Hearings: The Seige Continues

http://www.freerepublic.com ^ | February 23, 2003

[Mo1]

oh there is no doubt in my mind that she is behind all of this ..

I was in and out all day and heard a story about the Dems having a private meeting about Estrada .. is this true and if so .. who was in on it?

BTW .. have I mentioned .. I'm really digg'n my new computer chair .. LOL

[hoosiermama]

With Bayh it about money and poower. The dem keep him in line with both. If he even considers being the "conservative he says he is in Indiana", then the liberals start the rumor he might be considered for "something bigger" or Hillary et/al donates money to his campaign.

When speaking with his office, usually use vanity. "He certainly would be a good leader of his party if he stood up to the "small" minority supporting the filabuster.

BTW do we have a list of who has spoken on the floor and who hasn't.

[swheats]

You're dug in on this one. I can dig it. Same here.

[San Jacinto]

"...this nomination will not be pulled from the floor!

I think you are right about that, unless it is pulled back "temporarily" when the war breaks out.

Here is the deal as I see it-- There are not many Dems who are gonna break ranks on this. Most of them must have the support of the left fringe to stay in office. As for those who are subject to being pressured into voting for cloture-- there are problems with most of them. Dorgan, Pryor, and Landrieu have six years til the next election. Graham, Edwards, and Lieberman a seeking the Dem nomination.

The Dems are not worried about setting a bad precedent. For them, it's a good precedent. They get to stop Bush's judges. But if the GOP ever filibusters a judgeship, all hell will break loose. Then it really will be 24/7--- 24/7 PRESS COVERAGE, that is.

Which brings up the next point>>> There ain't no press coverage on Estrada. This is all going on under the radar. "Moderate" (cough,cough) Dems do not now feel like they will take a big hit by letting Estrada sink.

In order to change that scenario, the Republicans are going to have to make the cloture vote a BIG DEAL. The only way I see to do that is to go 24/7 so the networks will have nothing else to cover and then squak loudly how the 'Rats have shut down the Senate at a time of national crisis.

It would takes days and days and it still may not work, but it is the best plan, in my opinion. Even if the filibuster is not broken, at least more of the public will learn that NARAL and other loonies control the Dems.

[PhiKapMom]

I agree with you!

There is a definite strategy at work here. Rush is absolutely convinced that in time Estrada will be on the bench -- like when the war starts and the RATs don't want to be seen as obstructionist over a judicial nominee.

[Torie]

There are new rules for a different time. That is what happens when the judiciary becomes so politicized and so much is at stake. It may have been inevitable that only moderates can be confirmed unless one party gains supra ascendancy in the Senate. Perhaps I should put my name forward. This might be my moment. :) Of course, I would have to "explain" my participation on an "extreme" right wing web site. I suspect something might be lost in the translation in doing that. Oh well, back to the drawing boards.

[NeoCaveman]

There are new rules for a different time.

Sounds like "living document" hogwash to me. 51 is still a majority unless I missed an ammendment.

Sorry, George Will is right.

[Torie]

Will didn't really address the constitution, he addressed Hamilton's opinion in the Federalist papers. The idea that the Senate rule of cloture is unconstitutional when it comes to judicial nominees is total hogwash. It is ludicrous. If any respected constitutional scholar endorsed that view, I would be amazed. If SCOTUS ever went there, it would percipiatate a Constitutional crises. SCOTUS is therefore not going there, even if it were otherwise so inclined, which it isn't.

[jwalsh07]

Blame it on Torie Clark, I'll vouch for ya!

By the way, I agree it's not "unconstitutional" and SCOTUS would never touch it but it is anti-constitutional supported by any cursory reading of the FP's.

[Torie]

Alas, the Federalist papers were not incorporated by reference in the Constitution, and Hamilton's point I suspect was precatory, not mandatory. In any event, what constitutes "unfit" is subjective, just like what "high crimes and misdemeanors" is. And the final "jury" on that is the Senate itself. But then you already know all this I suspect.

[marajade]

With so little out there in relation to Estrada how do we know that he isn't a moderate?

[NeoCaveman]

If SCOTUS ever went there, it would percipiatate a Constitutional crises. SCOTUS is therefore not going there, even if it were otherwise so inclined, which it isn't.

Never said they would go there.

We can't go running to the courts everytime the Democrats want to ignore all precedents and history. Of course those things mean nothing to them. The only thing they care about is abortion on demand.

[MEG33]

Check out the Newsday article posted on latest posts.It's about Bush appointing NY judges .Schumer seems appeased.

[Torie]

Estrada has become a symbol, and a political football where the red and blue zones can have another shoot out. What he really believes or would do has ceased to have any relevance. That is particularly obvious since this isn't a SCOTUS nomination. And Estrada has one of those minds that I suspect he would suprise. My guess is that he is not a within the box thinker.

[marajade]

"Estrada has become a symbol, and a political football where the red and blue zones can have another shoot out"

And Bush should use it... in states like CA and NM...

[ACAC]

I agree with you. If 45 Democrats decide there is not going to be a vote om Estrada, then there is not going to be a vote on Estrada. Frist could hold them in session for 4 months and there would still be 45 Senators not allowing a vote on Estrada.

The silver lining is that now we can filibuster their nominees.

[Sacajaweau]

As usual, George Will did his homework.

Thanks for posting this. It's excellent.

[Miss Marple]

That is a nice column by George Will. However, you need to contact the moderator and have it removed because Will writes for the Washington Post and we are only allowed to do excerpts of their writers.

[TakeChargeBob]

I appreciate the link to the material on cloture.

The Estrada obstruction attempt belies a war that I am afraid we are not prepared to win. I do not believe that the senators realize the extent of the battle. If the Rats are intent on defying an extremely qualified hispanic, with the potential backlash, the ability for Bush to appoint his judges would be compromised, particularly with respect to the Supreme Court. By the way, the Estrada fight is intended to prevent the nomination of Estrada to the Supreme Court. The Rats know that they could not prevent the high profile nomination of the Supreme Court of Estrada is he had several years of DC Court experience. Our senators should realize this is a war and act accordingly.

I have some thoughts as to what might be done. I would appreciate some knowledgeable opinion as to the viabilty of these options. Perhaps there may be one viable option. I am thinking of much more than the Estrada nomination.

Options For Senators
1. Changing the rules
Is it possible for the republicans to change the cloture rules quickly? Frist would tell Dasshole that they are intending to go home for a 3 day weekend A number of republicans would make it seem that they are heading out of town. Concurrently, the Repubs could hold a long session with a few members going into the evening of the last day with a similar performance as last night - complaining about the unfairness of the Rats behavior. Presumably, most of the Rats will be out of town. Towards the end of the session, Frist comes out and says they are staying in session. All of the Repubs then come in the hall and they vote on a new rule which eliminates the supermajority requirements. Presumably, there would be a quorom and we would have a super majority of those senators present. This would pave the way for judiciary as well as tax cuts and the rest of the Bush agenda. the rationale for the lie is that the Rats are not acting honorably and can't be trusted. Remember this is a war.

2. Ignore the fillibuster and vote anyway - declaring a requirement of a supermajority in presidential nominations unconstitutional and bring it up to the Supreme Court to decide. In the meantime estrada would be appointed to the court.

What some of our lawyers can do
1. Bring up to the Supreme Court an actionable harm as a result of discrimination of conservatives (bringing up Shumers past qoutes about ideolgy) being appointed judges and the senate not constiutionally able to meet it's requirement for advise and consent. The supermajority is unconstitutional.

2. A similar angle is to bring up an ethnic discrimination charge and tie it into the unconstitutionality of the super majority.

Something must be done. I'm afraid that even if we win Estrada, we may be too worn down to continue what will be an ongoing war. I say, lets take the most aggressive possible action. We cannot sit back. Action must be taken.
Anyone have any good suggestions?