SwiftVets.com

[shawa]

Rush just said Ted Kennedy and Richard Durbin are proposing
that they filibuster Alberto Gonzales Nomination.

[shawa]

From Drudge:

JESSE J. HOLLAND, Associated Press Writer
Tuesday, February 1, 2005

(02-01) 10:54 PST WASHINGTON (AP) --

Senate Democrats are considering filibustering Alberto Gonzales' nomination to be attorney general over his role in developing the Bush administration's policies on treating foreign detainees.

No final decision has been made yet, but at least two Democrats -- Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., and Democratic Whip Richard Durbin of Illinois -- planned to urge the Democratic caucus Tuesday to consider filibustering Gonzales' nomination, said a Senate Democratic aide, who spoke on conditions of anonymity.

A filibuster, a parliamentary tactic for delaying Senate action, would require Republicans, who hold a 55-44 majority in the Senate, to win over at least five Democrats -- or four Democrats plus Vermont Sen. James Jeffords, an independent -- to put Gonzales in office.

Democrats were surprisingly united in opposing Gonzales in the Senate Judiciary Committee, something that was not achieved when they voted on current Attorney General John Ashcroft.

The aide, who did not want to be named because discussions were being held in private, said Democrats believe Gonzales is directly linked with prisoner abuses that occurred at Abu Ghraib in Iraq, in Afghanistan and at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and that allowing his confirmation would be akin to supporting the mistreatment.

Democrats' opposition to Gonzales "derive from the nominee's involvement in the formulation of a number of policies that have tarnished our country's moral leadership in the world and put American soldiers and American citizens at greater risk," Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., said during a Senate debate Tuesday.

Gonzales, who served as White House counsel during Bush's first term, would replace Ashcroft if confirmed. He would be the nation's first Hispanic attorney general.

Whether or not a filibuster is mounted, a vote by the Senate on Gonzales' confirmation will not occur until at least Thursday, after Bush's State of the Union speech Wednesday night, GOP senators said. They said Democrats don't want to give Bush a success to talk about in his first State of the Union speech of his second term.

"They want the bully pulpit all the way up to and after that to try to taint this nominee with the perceived sins of the Bush administration," said Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas.


URL: http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/news/archive/2005/02/01/national1351EST0577.DTL


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maybe Frist has to employ the "nuclear option".
This appointment is important to President Bush.

[GM Strong]

Let them try, the fence straddling Dems will have to commit. The Leadership will have to Sh** or get off the pot, the "Nuke option used and the Liberal leadership deflated. The time for accommodating this crap is over. Reid, Kennedy, Shumer, Durbin and the rest need to be embarrassed and humiliated.
_________________
8th Army Korea 68-69

[shawa]

Whoops, there's been an update.
First, they want to do it but went to lunch and then decided not to.
Within less than an hour from the first report, they said they've
now decided not to filibuster Gonzales, but will have debate
on the floor to voice their concerns about Gonzales and Abu Ghraib.

Frist said on Hannity that the Dems are floundering and flailing,
but apparently they want to save the filibuster ploy for future
judicial appointments. Frist said it ain't gonna work.

[Leeman]

There is not much to be done really, just stand aside The Dems will make fools of themsleves, embarass themsleves & humiliate themsleves.

Just stand aside & watch..You saw how they acted last week on Condi's nomination. Do you think they are winning themsleves any backers in the Black & hispanic communities by showing such disrespect for two qualified people.


Leeman

[RogerRabbit]

My understanding is that there is a way around this fillabuster. The majority leadaer asks the Senate chair (whomever is sitting in it on that day) how many votes to confirm 51 as the Constitution says or 61 to end the fillabuster.

If he/she says a simple majority then the vote must go to the floor. They can still fillabuster but must do it the old fashioned way - talk themselves to death (maybe we could get rid of a couple easteners that way).

The dems can moan and groan but not much else but file a complaint. It seems they are not real willing to do this as it also could hurt them also one day. I say the hell with them and start thinking about the citizenry
_________________
"Si vis pacem, para bellum"