 |
SwiftVets.com
Service to Country
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
shawa
CNO
Joined: 03 Sep 2004
Posts: 2004
|
 Posted: Wed May 25, 2005 12:48 pm Post subject: SENATE CHARADE |
 |
|
This editorial nails it!!!
http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110006734
| Quote: |
A remarkable exercise in political self-protection.
Wednesday, May 25, 2005 12:01 a.m. EDT
Judging by all of the self-congratulation, you'd think the 14 Senators who reached a deal Monday on judicial nominations were the moral equivalent of the Founding Fathers. "We have kept the Republic," declared Democrat Robert Byrd, with all due modesty. "The Senate won" and "the country won," added Republican John McCain. All 14 are apparently destined for Mount Rushmore, as soon as Mr. Byrd can stuff the money for the sculpture into an appropriations bill.
What a charade. This ballyhooed "compromise" is all about saving the Senators themselves, not the Constitution. Its main point is to shield the group of 14 from the consequences of having to cast difficult, public votes in a filibuster showdown. Thus they split the baby on the most pressing nominees, giving three of them a vote while rejecting two others on what seem to be entirely arbitrary grounds, so Members of both parties can claim victory. Far better to cashier nominees as a bipartisan phalanx, rather than face up to their individual "advice and consent" responsibilities.
Meanwhile, the statesmen and women are able to postpone any real fighting over the filibuster until the inevitable Supreme Court nomination later this Congress. We don't often agree with North Dakota Democrat Byron Dorgan, but he had it about right when he called the deal "legislative castor oil. It averts the showdown vote tomorrow, but I doubt it's over." All in all, we can't recall a more cynical Senate performance since the phony impeachment trial of Bill Clinton.
And it's cynicism squared in the case of the three nominees who will now finally be confirmed. Yesterday, 81 Senators voted to give Priscilla Owen a vote on the floor, after four years of Democratic filibusters. Apparently she isn't such a grave "extremist" threat after all. The same also applies to Janice Rogers Brown (22 months in the dock) and Bill Pryor (25 months). Monday's deal exposes the long Democratic campaign against them as "extremists" as nothing more than a political sop to People for the American Way and their ilk.
Henry Saad and William Myers aren't so fortunate. They'll be denied a vote because the Republican Seven had to give their Democratic co-signers some trophies to take back to their Senate caucus. The text of the agreement is mum on other nominees, but AP quoted anonymous Democrats as saying that the nominations of both Brett Kavanaugh and William Haynes are also in jeopardy, again for purely arbitrary reasons. And don't forget the highly qualified choices--Miguel Estrada, Carolyn Kuhl, Claude Allen, Charles Pickering--who previously withdrew their names rather than keep their careers in suspended Senate nomination.
As for the future, the deal's impact hangs on the exquisite ambiguity of the phrase "extraordinary circumstances." The seven Democrats promise to filibuster only if a nomination reaches that threshold, which will of course be in the eye of every beholder. Taken at face value, and if the Democrats mean what they say, this should rule out a filibuster against anyone but a crook or incompetent. The political costs of opposing a Supreme Court nominee are also higher than for an appeals-court judge because the country is paying closer attention. Thus a filibuster will not be easy for Red State Democrats to support.
But there is a cynical irony here, too. To defeat a Supreme Court nominee, liberal interest groups will now be obliged to manufacture the very "extraordinary circumstances" that would give Democrats among the Gang of 14 an excuse to filibuster. Thus they will have even greater incentive than before to dig through a nominee's personal and professional life for any mud they can throw against him. In the name of consensus and comity, in short, these 14 "moderates" have increased the chances that the Senate will witness a future, bloody Borking.
The fervent hope of these 14 is that President Bush will spare them from such controversy by nominating someone acceptable to the left--say, another David Souter. Their agreement therefore warns Mr. Bush that he is obliged "to consult with members of the Senate, both Democratic and Republican, prior to submitting a judicial nomination to the Senate for consideration."
We hope he ignores them. Mr. Bush is under no obligation to reward Senators who have mistreated his nominees in this fashion. He owes far more to the supporters who helped him win re-election and his party pick up five Southern Senate seats last year. To vet his nominees with this Gang of 14 is a virtual guarantee of judicial mediocrity--of a lowest-common-denominator choice or a philosophic cipher.
Especially in the wake of this deal, our advice is the same as it was after Election Day last year. If Chief Justice William Rehnquist retires, promote Associate Justices Antonin Scalia or Clarence Thomas, and replace him with a distinguished conservative jurist such as Michael Luttig, Ted Olson, Michael McConnell, Sam Alito or for that matter Miguel Estrada. The President is granted the power to nominate judges under the Constitution because he is the only official elected by the entire nation. He shouldn't cede that authority to 14 Senators in desperate search of political cover. |
I hope the President brings back Estrada!!
_________________
“I love the man that can smile in trouble, that can gather strength from distress, and grow brave by reflection. ‘Tis the business of little minds to shrink; but he whose heart is firm, and whose conscience approves his conduct, will pursue his principles unto death.” (Thomas Paine, 1776) |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
shawa
CNO
Joined: 03 Sep 2004
Posts: 2004
|
| Posted: Wed May 25, 2005 2:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
As the day went on yesterday, I became a little less furious.
Senator Frist's first remarks were that HE didn't sign on to this deal!! I called his office to tell him to hold the line against these insurgents.They assured me that he intended to do just that.
When I heard him on Hannity later, he said he intends to bring EVERY ONE of the president's nominees to a vote!! They will not jettison anyone. The first three will be voted and confirmed. And he intends to bring the rest forward and we will see what happens. If the Dems attempt to filibuster again for whatever "extraordinary" reason, theCONSTITUTIONAL OPTION WILL BE USED.
As for the seven RINO moderates, they basked in their 15 minutes of fame, being lauded by the MSM as 'saviors'. But they have branded themselves as traitors and will have to deal with their home state voters.
For some it won't matter, apparently their constituency likes a moderate.
But for three of them, Graham, Warner, and DeWine are facing an uproar
from their home state, their offices are being inundated with angry calls.
It was fun to see them acting so sheepish and defensive as the day wore on trying to 'splain themselves'. (Lindsey Graham especially, sounded very down) and said that Frist's OPTION could still be used down the line
if the Dems filibuster, and he would support it.
He's backtracking real quick as a result of IRATE reaction from his constituents.
All in all, I am thinking positive.
The three nominees are agreed upon to get an up or down vote and will
be confirmed. Frist will bring up the ALL of the remaining nominees and will push for a vote.
If the Dems filibuster, the public will see THEM as breaking the "agreement" and Frist uses the CONSTITUTIONAL OPTION.
Maybe I'm being a pollyanna, but when you're handed lemons, make lemonade!!
_________________
“I love the man that can smile in trouble, that can gather strength from distress, and grow brave by reflection. ‘Tis the business of little minds to shrink; but he whose heart is firm, and whose conscience approves his conduct, will pursue his principles unto death.” (Thomas Paine, 1776) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Navy wife
Research Director
Joined: 09 Aug 2004
Posts: 353
Location: Arlington, VA & Ft. Worth, TX
|
| Posted: Wed May 25, 2005 2:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Thank you for posting this editorial. I am so angry at my FORMER Senator, John Warner. It will be a cold day in __ _ _ before I vote for him again. I hope someone in his office reads my email t his morning and I dare them to send me a form letter "I appreciate hearing your views..." It's time for Virginia to find a new senator.
Navy Wife |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
shawa
CNO
Joined: 03 Sep 2004
Posts: 2004
|
| Posted: Wed May 25, 2005 5:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Hah!! I found someone who is also thinking positive.
From the Prowler at the American Spectator:
http://www.spectator.org/dsp_article.asp?art_id=8209
| Quote: | Washington Prowler
Here's the Deal
By The Prowler
Published 5/24/2005 12:09:38 AM
"There is no way this agreement that breaks Democratic obstruction can be spun any way other than as a victory for Republicans and the Bush Administration," said a Republican Senate leadership aide late Monday night, regarding the agreement reached by 14 senators to avert a showdown vote on the so-called nuclear option that would have ended Democratic filibustering of Bush judicial nominees.
The parameters of the deal insure that six of eight obstructed Bush nominees to the federal judiciary will receive an up or down confirmation vote in the Senate. The three most opposed Bush nominees to the court, Priscilla Owen, Janice Rogers Brown and William Pryor, will not have their nominations blocked any longer; also, three other Bush nominees will eventually receive an up or down confirmation vote as well; the only two nominees who still may be filibustered are Michigan judge Henry Saad and William Myers.
Also as part of the compromise, the Democrat moderates promise to prevent any future filibuster of Bush appeals court and Supreme Court nominees. While Democrats were able to have their "extraordinary circumstances" clause inserted in the deal, no one anticipates that such a situation will arise, assuming Democrats keep their promise. And it appears that a number of promises were being tossed around the negotiation room on Monday afternoon.
Several Republican senators involved in negotiations swore that not only will the six Bush nominees be given an up or down vote, but that Democrats in the room were aware that Republicans involved in the negotiations had agreed to vote cloture on Myers as well, and that Democratic negotiators had agreed that such a move could take place, thus also allowing Myers an up or down vote in the Senate. "Assuming that our guys hold themselves to that promise," says another Republican staffer working on the Judiciary committee, "then we're looking at a clean sweep for confirmations."
That said, Republican Judiciary Committee staffers said it would have been difficult to clear Saad for confirmation, regardless of the Democrats' unethical behavior in his case. Democratic Judiciary Committee staff and Senate Democratic leadership coordinated an attack against Saad by providing and then sending Sen. Harry Reid a memo detailing uncorroborated raw interview notes from Saad's confidential FBI background check.
"Saad has served on the bench in Michigan, he has been a public figure for years, he has had close associations with several Senate and House members from the state of Michigan," says a Washington lobbyist who has met with Saad on occasion. "This is an honorable man whose nomination was badly damaged by Democrats. Any future nominee should be aware of what the Democrats will do to destroy a good conservative."
If there are any potential losers in this deal, it is the moderate Republicans who have put their reputations on the line with not only their Republican colleagues, but also conservative voters. "If Myers doesn't get a vote, if a reasonable Supreme Court nominee does not receive a vote, or has his or her nomination blocked, then those moderate Republicans should be held accountable by not only the caucus but their constituents," said the Republican Judiciary staffer.
HOW TRUE TO THEIR word Democrats will be may become apparent in about a month, when Supreme Court Chief Justice William Rehnquist is expected to announce his retirement. Already in Washington rumors are swirling that current Attorney General Alberto Gonzales may be under serious consideration for the empty slot left vacant after one of the sitting justices is elevated to fill Rehnquist's role.. "You look at what he hasn't done in his few months at Justice," says a former White House staffer, "and it makes you think he's really been looking ahead and trying to keep as clear from controversy as he can."
Gonzales has managed to sidestep taking a position on the Terri Schiavo legal battle, and beyond stating his basic support for the eight judicial nominees in limbo, he has avoided being embroiled in this current debate. As well, he has made very few public appearances where anything remotely controversial could have been uttered.
"Everything points to a Gonzales nomination," says a lobbyist aware of the White House thinking on prospective judicial nominees.
One school of thought related to the threat of a constitutional "nuclear" option was that it would ensure the Bush White House an easier time in putting forward a solid conservative as the president's first nomination to the Supreme Court. But Gonzales would be unacceptable to just about every conservative group in Washington and beyond.
"I don't know of any conservative who worked to reelect this president who would be satisfied with a Gonzales nomination," says a Senate Judiciary staffer. "This president was reelected because conservatives want to see a conservative on the Court. If the president has a second opportunity, then perhaps there is room for Gonzales. But only after the president fulfills his promise to voters." |
Forget Gonzales, leave him as AG, I don't trust him on the Supreme Court.
_________________
“I love the man that can smile in trouble, that can gather strength from distress, and grow brave by reflection. ‘Tis the business of little minds to shrink; but he whose heart is firm, and whose conscience approves his conduct, will pursue his principles unto death.” (Thomas Paine, 1776) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
