Filibuster challenge for GOP

The Washington Times ^ | 3-1-03 | Linda Chavez

[Oldeconomybuyer]

It's time Republicans learned to play hardball. Democrats don't really want to filibuster Miguel Estrada's nomination to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia. They aren't anxious to stay up all night and give marathon speeches on the dangers Mr. Estrada purportedly poses to the Republic. Tom Daschle needs his beauty rest, after all.

[Miss Marple]

Linda Chavez wasn't watching the Senate debate the other night. Nor did she talk to Frist or Hatch about this.

[freeper12]

>>Republicans can't deliver when it counts.

That kind of sums it up I would say.

[pt17]

With only a mild sarcasm, I would like to mention that Linda Chavez fails to point out that a congress person's instinctive priority is go get reelected, not necessarily do the right thing. Whether or not the Republicans can overcome this instinct and do the right thing by Estrada remains to be seen.

[mombonn]

Tom Daschle needs his beauty rest, after all.

If he slept the rest of his life, it wouldn't help.

[putupon]

No one seems to have the stomach for a real filibuster today, Democrats or Republicans. Instead of holding the Democrats' feet to the fire to force them to keep talking, the GOP leadership allowed senators to go home for the Presidents' Day recess without voting on Mr. Estrada. Now, Republicans are letting the Democrats drag out the debate day after day, without forcing obstinate senators to stay on the floor round the clock and on weekends.

What a dissappointment Sen. Frist has beeen so far. Rush Limbaugh quoted a story yesterday saying Frist was going to let the Estrada nomination go to a vote on Tues., which will probably result in 55/45 vote, a loss for us because we 60/40 to break the filibuster.

I was a huge supporter of Sen. Frist to get the majority leader position, thinking he might use his surgical skills to transplant some missing cajones back into the GOP Senate. Now it appears he is using those skills to remove any that may still remain.

Even worse, a skilled cardiac surgeon under oath to assist the sick in close proximity to that huge blob of cholesterol a.k.a. Teddy Kennedy may even delay that big ball of fat's appointment with the fire one day, if you get my drift.

Freep Frist

[truthkeeper]

Well, I was watching the senate debate and I agree with her assessment. BTW, I heard on Hannity today that the Fox story regarding the cloture vote on Tuesday is in error; that there will be no cloture on "on that day" according to Santorum and Hatch's offices. I guess I'll have to scout around FR for threads on this matter to get the real story.

I say the Republicans should invoke old Chinese curse ("Be careful what you wish for...") and let the RATS have at it.

[ThirstyMan]

Done! Thanks for the link.
If the Republicans don't stand up to this challenge then they're toast. People will no longer respect them. The American people elected conservatives to represent them for a reason.
It was well known that the next President was very likely to have a key role in shaping the Court. Now if Frist allows the Democrats to bully the will of the people away from their grasp, what do you think will happen to them?

[scooby321]

Start Talking about the Democratic Appointed 9th rulings and how many times they have been overturned as a Court Chuckie Teddy and Hillary Love

[Caipirabob]

If he slept the rest of his life, it wouldn't help.

So true, in his case "ugly" soaks right through to the soul.

[hoosiermama]

"Tom Daschle needs his beauty rest, after all."

And Hillary doesn't?!?!?!?! (sarcasm off)

[San Jacinto]

It is probably too late now to force the Democrats' hand.

Why so? My understanding of Frist's position is that there will be a vote on cloture. The vote is likely to fail. The vote on cloture will not mark the end of the fight, but merely the real beginning.

I take that to mean that after the cloture vote fails, the "debate" will assume 24/7 status. The Dems will be tested as to whether they can sustain an actual filibuster. Given the paucity of any legitimate argument against Estrada, this may prove difficult.

As a footnte, I would add that the winner of the filibuster battle will not depend on Frist per se , but on the 4 or 5 northern RINO Senators from the northeast. In other words, it comes down to a RINO vs. DINO fight-- just like all the other close issues that come before such an evenly divided Senate.

[11th_VA]

Already posted

[votelife]

Dear President Bush,
With the Surpeme Court session getting ready to close, it may well be time for perhaps the most important domestic decision of your presidency: the appointment of a Supreme Court Justice(s). The main reason why I supported you in 2000 and why I wanted Daschle out of power in 02 (and 04) has to do with the courts. I want America courts to interpret law, not write law. During your presidential campaign you said Thomas and Scalia were your two model justices. Those are excellent models. The High Court needs more like them. Clarence Thomas recently said to students that the tough cases were when what he wanted to do was different from what the law said. And he goes by the law. This should be a model philosophy for our justices. Your father, President Bush lost his reelection campaign for 3 main reasosn, as far as I can see. 1. he broke the no new taxes pledge 2. David Souter 3. Clinton convinced people we were in a Bush recession (which we had already come out of by the time Clinton was getting sworn in)

I urge you to learn from all three of these: 1. on taxes, you're doing great. Awesome job on the tax cut. 2. good job so far on judicial appointments. I want to see more of a fight for Estrada, Owen, and Pickering, but I commend you on your nominations. 3. by staying engaged in the economic debate you'll serve yourself well

I have been thoroughly impressed with your handling of al Queida, Iraq, and terrorism. You have inspired confidence and have shown great leadership.

But I want to remind you that your Supreme Court pick(s) will be with us LONG after you have departed office. I urge you to avoid the tempation to find a "compromise" pick. Go for a Scalia or Thomas. Don't go for an O'Connor or Kennedy. To be specific, get someone who is pro-life. Roe v Wade is one of the worst court decisions I know of, and it's the perfect example of unrestrained judicial power.

I know the temptation will be tremendous on you to nominate a moderate. But remember who your true supporters are. I am not a important leader or politician. I am "simply" a citizen who has been an enthusiatic supporter of you. I am willing to accept compromise in many areas of government but I will watch your Court nomiantions extremely closely. What the Senate Dems are doing right now is disgusting, but as the President you have the bully pulpit to stop it. Democrats will back down if you turn up serious heat on them.

Moreover, I think public opinion is shifting towards the pro-life position. Dems will want you to nominate a moderate, but almost all will vote against you anyways. Pro-choice Repubs will likely still vote for you if you nominate a Scalia, after all, you campaigned on it. So Mr. President, I urge you to stick with your campaign statements and nominate justices who believe in judicial restraint, like Scalia and Thomas.

Happy Memorial Day and may God bless you and your family.