More Filibuster To Chew On
Posted by TFG on May 24th, 2005
The Claremonsters: Will some elected official please defend the Constitution?
Mac Owen, quoting Aaron Tippin: “you’ve got to stand for something, or you’ll fall for anything.”
No Left Turns: Their principal goal all along has been simply obstructionist, not a matter of principle. Since their charges of extremism were in this case so lightly abandoned, no one ought to take them seriously again.
Reid Stott, Photodude: But at the very least, this should be a “shot across the bow” for partisans that there is a “sensible center” you ignore at your own peril, many of whom are very much turned off by the current partisan warfare.
Final word for now from Francis Poretto:
But of course, the main event still looms in our future: the need to replace between two and four Supreme Court Justices over the next three years. Anyone who thinks the Democrats will permit a Republican president and his Senate backers to select those justices without the bloodiest and most vicious struggle in the history of parliamentary politics simply hasn’t been paying attention. Robert Bork and Clarence Thomas were warm-up frames for what the Left will do at the next Supreme Court nomination.
Bottom line here is that this is not about party, it’s about American principle. We have, in essence, allowed a Star Chamber to form and to wield power, to the point of informing the President that he really needs to swing by and discuss any future nominations, if he knows what’s good for him, wink wink. Perhaps I’m seeing things that aren’t there, but that, all by itself, just really bugs the hell out of me.
May 24th, 2005 at 9:09 pm
Oh yeah, the supreme court is going to be a total bar room brawl.
Bush is going to try and select someone to keep the Far Far Right happy, the Democrats are going to fight it like he selected Hitler (which Bush probably would if Hitler was 1) Alive 2) American 3) A judge)
Can you fillibuster a court nomination?
If so, is there a max length?
May 24th, 2005 at 10:17 pm
I actually got a chance to ask Thomas about this during a visit to D.C. with a group of college students. Hard to believe his nomination was over 15 years ago. He said he shuddered to think what the next nominee would go through, because as fierce as his nomination battle was, things have only gotten worse since.
May 24th, 2005 at 10:17 pm
Well, you couldn’t until 2005. Things change. I think the max length is how long you can read out of the phone book. That’s what I learned growing up, but that shit seems to be pretty much out the window lately.
Nice Nazi reference, too, chief. Try to rein that in, m’kay? Arguments, good — idiocy, bad.
May 26th, 2005 at 5:34 pm
Come on, since when have I ever backed down from taking cheap shots? It’s what I do.
But OK, I’ll try and behave.
So theoretically, a bunch of democratic senators could just get all hopped up on speed and read out loud from the Bible (choice of book is to put the Republicans in an uncomfortable position) until they fall over?
What an odd system.
May 27th, 2005 at 10:00 am
I think you got it. Except they’re Democrats. We’re all democratic. In a republic. Which is not Republican (or maybe it is, for today anyway.)
Yeah, it’s odd. Seems to work pretty good.
June 2nd, 2005 at 8:21 am
That would be great reading out of the bible , since these guys seem to think they are Godlike!