SENATE MATH - WHERE ELSE IS 41 GREATER THAN 59? (ZELL MILLER MAKES FUN OF FELLOW RATS)

WSJ ^ | 3/15/03 | Zell Miller

[Elkiejg]

A portly British statesman once famously said that "democracy is based on reason and fair play." But there's nothing reasonable or fair about what's been happening in the Senate recently. The filibuster against Bush nominee Miguel Estrada is not just an expensive waste of time and taxpayer money, it's also an affront to majority rule, the principle that democracy operates on everywhere.

[Behind Liberal Lines]

Zell, I've held off saying this. But now is the time to switch.

We don't need you for the majority. Do it for the principle, not the power (ala Jeffords).

It's time to stand up and tell the world "these Dems are unprincipled bums and I'm not on their team anymore."

[Elkiejg]

AGREE to Zell switching. If Zell can't get his "fellow" RATS to end this unethical action - I would guess our emails, phone calls, etc. aren't making any impression either.

[CROSSHIGHWAYMAN]

Zell, ever the country bumpkin, doesn't understand liberal math.

Package the Estrada vote with a tax increase and all the Dems would hold their noses and vote yea!

Help is on the way.

President Bush will successfully equate the Democrat Senators' intransigence with what France is now doing at the UN.

A filibuster-proof Senate is within reach at the 2004 election.
There are up to 12 vulnerable Dem. Sens. either running for reelection or retiring.

It's time to make hay and retake the country for the people.

[TomGuy]

That is the same conclusion I had last week:

LIVE THREAD: Estrada Filibuster (Cloture vote) 03/13/03

Posted by TomGuy to Howlin
On News/Activism 03/13/2003 8:41 AM CST #26 of 291

Only in politics can a minority of 41 overrule a majority of 59.

[AMNZ]

Very excellent point.
DemocRats/French same thing = Obstructionist

P.S. a conservative from Connecticut - thought my son was the only one.

[You Dirty Rats]

Maggie Thatcher lost the Leadership election of 1990 and her premiership because she received 54% of the vote of the Tory MPs and needed 55%.

8 votes in the UN security council is a majority but not enough to pass a resolution.

The 'Rats have lost the votes. They are a minority party but refuse to give up power. Despite the fact that they have lost, through the ballot box, the White House and both houses of Congress, they now resort to undemocratic means (Filibustering, Activist Judges, other countries in the UN, SCONJ changing the rules to allow Lautenberg to run) to hold onto power. They know that losing control of the courts would finish them; hence, their desperation as evidenced by this unconscionable filibuster.

[observer5]

The DEMS are sleezeballs. If they cannot win with their goofy aganda they will use any sleeze to some get it anyway. No ethics, no SHAME.

They did a number on Bush Senior when they balckmailed him by boycotting any negotiations with Bush unless he would raise taxes. Bush fell for it and broke his no new taxes promise. The Dems are still snickering today how that destroyed the reputation of Bush Senior.

Disgusting!

[wgeorge2001]

"Or we could modify what I call the Two Track Trick, installed a few years ago, which allows a "filibuster lite" to proceed without any heavy lifting while another piece of legislation is being considered at the same time. With this devious device the Senate avoids the inconvenience and pain of a real filibuster. Powder-puff 16-ounce gloves are used instead of bare knuckles, but it still can go on and on ad nauseam. It's just that the public doesn't notice it as much. And that's the point--public debate is turned down real low. "

The"fillibuster lite" is a mockery and certainly gives more power to the minority to thwart the majority interests; the democrats interests are evil and must be undone asap. They most certainly have found ways to run the end around the conservative majority.

[observer5]

The RAPIST Clinton is still their darling and the world's most poopular president. What has the world come to!

[mj1234]

Maybe you can help me...(I hate the Demonrats)
when the Clintooons tried to take over the health
care industry, they were saying the same thing about
the Republicans (I think they had a majority of 58 votes)
It was one of the few times that the Republicans not only
stood up,but they defeated that Marxist piece of
legislation- now I know this is NOTHING like that,
but maybe the Demonrats felt they could force a compromise
on some other issue? I have written Mark Dayton-chastized
him for this crap no response -I HOPE THE REPUBLICANS
GET A SUPER MAJORITY IN 2004!

[Sci Fi Guy]

But now is the time to switch.

Why??? He's far more valuable where he is-giving bipartisan support for many of the president's bills. If he became a republican, we would have to give him a leadership post. And to be blunt he does vote liberal on some issues.. He's not a 100% conservative.

[Tamzee]

I adore Miller.... one of the only principled Democrats out there. We should send him flowers :-)

[xrp]

Are you kidding? Zell Miller is far better off as a Democrat. Why? Well, Zell usually does what is RIGHT, not playing party man. Most of us in Georgia like and support Zell because of what he does, not what party he aligns with. By him being so outspoken as a Democrat, he is showing how pathetic and thoughtless the current-day Democratic Party is.

Besides, his term expires in 2004 and he is not running for re-election. Unless he supports the Democratic candidate for Senate for Georgia in 2004, that seat is going to a Republican. The Republicans already have control of the Senate. Zell, switching from D to R right now in 2003 would do absolutely nothing.

Zell is wrong on one thing, he talks about abolishing Title XXII or whatever...he's wrong there, we need to reverse the Constitutional Amendment that allowed for the direct election of Senators and give that power back to State legislatures.

[M Kehoe]

It's time for Senator ML Frist to keep the chamber in session all night long. Make the RATS read the Yellow Pages out loud into the early morning. Or maybe recite the Constitution. Would probably be the first time for many of them.

5.56mm

[69ConvertibleFirebird]

Zell is a better republican than republicans, bump...

[Conservateacher]

"All of this came to naught, however, after the Republicans solidly opposed it and Sen. Robert Byrd enlightened his
fellow Democratic senators with the story of how Cato II, in 60 B.C., got the floor in the Roman Senate at midday and
spoke until sundown"

"He made his point--as senators love to do--but ended up killing himself."

Is Zell sending Byrd a message?

[Future Useless Eater]

I call for activists in 3 states to contact their Senators...

The 'rule of 60' can and should be challenged in the Supreme Court and here's why:

• Whenever a batch of new Senators are elected to a NEW CONGRESS, they have had NO SAY in the passing of those 'special rules' not spelled out in the Constitution.
• Every new election by the people constitutes a change of heart of voters in one or more states.
• Rules from past congresses continue to force the PAST WILL of the voters, not the CURRENT WILL of voters.
• Every new Senator swears to uphold the Constitution,
  NOT the Constitution + (past wishes of voters)
• Every state that voted for a NEW REPRESENTATIVE expressed it's will for CHANGES in the Senate.

  NORM COLEMAN: As my Senator, would you please start a lawsuit against your handcuffs from past elections?

  Please join forces with

• Saxby Chambliss (R) Georgia, and
• Jim Talent (R) Missouri,
  who are also being denied their rights to represent their states per the Constitution.