Should Democrats Filibuster Alito?

http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/11/01/alito.ap/index.html
from JoeUser Forums

The Nomination of Samuel Alito is barely a day old, and Some democrats, notably Barbara Boxer, have already stated that the Filibuster option is back on the table.  While Boxer is a charter member of the loony loopy Luddite liberals, Schumer and Durbin have been growling as well.

This is not a question of will they try to filibuster, as only time will tell.  This is a question of should they.

Already 3 of the 7 Republican members of the gang of 14 have stated this is no time to filibuster and if they do, the Nuclear option is back on the table as well.  Those 3 represent enough votes (along with the 48 members who are not a part of the gang) to exercise the nuclear option.  And the thing about the nuclear option, is once those bullets are out of the barrel, there is no stuffing them back in.  In other words, once it is used, the filibuster is dead on Judicial nominations.  Unless a majority re-instates it (and why would a majority take power away from themselves?).

Bush's numbers are very low right now, and the democrats think they have a real chance to pick up some senate seats in 06.  If the Nuclear option is used, those votes are useless as it would still take a simple majority to confirm any Judicial nominee and Bush would still be in charge of the nominating. So if one of the liberal members of the court were to retire or die before 09, then Bush would be free to nominate another conservative, and the democrats would be powerless to stop him.

But if they do not filibuster now, then should they pick up a few seats next year, they can force Bush to nominate a moderate for the court as Bush will not have the votes for the Nuclear Option.

The math is simple and it is a gamble, but with the republicans holding all the aces right now, only a stupid person would pull the trigger (Boxer being just such a person).  Over the next 2 months, it will be played out and we will find out.  Do the democrats have any intelligence left?  Or just the rabid hatred that has driven them over the last 5 years.

politics
13,112 views 32 replies
Reply #1 from JoeUser Forums Top

"why those who want to pack the court with judicial activists are so much more enthusiastic about him" - Harry Reid

Uh, Harry, they want to UNPACK it.  You know, let you guys make the laws and they will just interpret them?

Reply #2 from JoeUser Forums Top
No. If they want to pick supreme court justices, they need to win an election or three. I didn't have a problem with the debate over meirs. That was based on her experience and lack thereof. If a judge has the experience necessary, and has performed in good standing, then they should shut the hell up and stop trying to subvert the Constitution.
Offworld Trading Company
Reply #3 from JoeUser Forums Top

No. If they want to pick supreme court justices, they need to win an election or three. I didn't have a problem with the debate over meirs. That was based on her experience and lack thereof. If a judge has the experience necessary, and has performed in good standing, then they should shut the hell up and stop trying to subvert the Constitution.

I agree and dont think that the filibuster should ever be used.  But the question here is really, should they try (no conservative will answer yes, but what about the liberals?)?  Given the math that has already developed, it is clear they should not.  But with saber rattling, some may try.  Maybe all will try.  Only 41 need to try it to invoke the nuclear option, and the democrats have not shown much sanity or political savvy of late.

Reply #4 from JoeUser Forums Top
No I hate the filibuster...it is boring to watch.......hahahaha. Just kidding.

I think if the people who elected them call and demand they filibuster, well they should be doing it as long as it remains legal. They are elected to REPRESENT the people, so if Democrats who elect them want a filibuster, well they should get it.

Of course I know there is no way for them to get a real feel from their constiuents......but it would be ideal.
Reply #5 from JoeUser Forums Top

I think if the people who elected them call and demand they filibuster, well they should be doing it as long as it remains legal. They are elected to REPRESENT the people, so if Democrats who elect them want a filibuster, well they should get it.

Interesting.  I dont think Senators listen to constituents except during election year.  And I dont think the democrats care this time, one way or the other.  I doubt Boxer canvassed California before deciding the Filibuster was back in vogue.

But on the off chance that they did listen to their constituents, I suspect a majority would tell them not to.  Just a hunch there.

Reply #6 from JoeUser Forums Top
Reid said THAT about packing the court? Every president tries to stuff the court full of their ideological match. It's an established fact. The court members try to time their retirements to match the presidential term of a like-minded president, for crying out loud. Reid crying out about court-stuffing is like crying about the sly practice of putting socks on one's feet before one's shoes.

I will say this: Alito is truly the President's man; he is a conservative in the mold of Robert Bork and has double-digit years of judicial experience. To show that he is acceptable on both sides of the aisle, he was unanimously appointed to a federal court in a Democratically-held Senate. I think Dem's reaction to him is just the "automatic gainsaying" of the Presidential pick just to establish a contrary position. I do not see the nuclear option or a filibuster on the horizon. Despite his conservative record, I think this nomination will sail on through. Chuck and Dick (their preferred monikers), and Babs will have to wait for another day.

I don't think Senators listen to constituents except during election year.


Excellent observation, Guy. Very accurate, clear and concise.
Reply #7 from JoeUser Forums Top

Chuck and Dick (their preferred monikers), and Babs will have to wait for another day.

Sounds like one of Bluttos parties!

But I agree with your post.  Look What Roosevelt tried to do!  I guess he was a member of the VRWC?????

Reply #8 from JoeUser Forums Top
But on the off chance that they did listen to their constituents, I suspect a majority would tell them not to. Just a hunch there.


Yeah, I dunno. See politics are oil to my water at this juncture in my life. Probably because I was FORCED to cover it while in the news business...and now well I'm not. It's my time out period...haha.

If a say, Dem Pres wanted a really crappy (imo) sc justice I'd say FILIBUSTER!!! Do whatever you can to make sure he or she does not get the bench!

Would they listen? Probably only if it fit into their agenda....

I dunno much but I know politics is a whore's game. She always follows the money and in the end, well, someones gettin screwed!
Reply #9 from JoeUser Forums Top

I dunno much but I know politics is a whore's game. She always follows the money and in the end, well, someones gettin screwed!

That gets you a cookie for the best description I have ever read!

Reply #10 from JoeUser Forums Top
That gets you a cookie for the best description I have ever read!


Thanks, it really did just come to me! But I am sure it has been said in different ways a million times.!

Thanks for the cookie!! YUM YUM
Reply #11 from JoeUser Forums Top

Thanks, it really did just come to me! But I am sure it has been said in different ways a million times.!

Thanks for the cookie!! YUM YUM

It could have been, but this is a Tova7 Original!

Reply #12 from JoeUser Forums Top
Wow, my first (blushes) and no doubt my last! Buwhahahaha
Reply #13 from JoeUser Forums Top

Wow, my first (blushes) and no doubt my last! Buwhahahaha

Wanna Bet?

Reply #14 from JoeUser Forums Top
Pfft. You are an optimist aren't you!
Reply #15 from JoeUser Forums Top
Should the Democrats filibuster? No.

Will they? In the words of the character in the Looney Tunes cartoons: eh! Could be.

If they are smart, they sit on their hands and be glad they prevented any number of the judges they've already blocked. They've exercised far more power than they should already, and yet they still want more. Apparently they still fail to understand that unless they win some elections they are in the minority. If they want to energize their base, they should make a lot of noise about the Alito nomination, vote against it, but let it proceed to an up-or-down vote. Lose in the battle, and hope to win in the war. Get the base all upset and promise them that if they can just take back a few seats they can prevent the problems in the future.
Reply #16 from JoeUser Forums Top
Get the base all upset and promise them that if they can just take back a few seats they can prevent the problems in the future.


Yup....if I was a Dem that'd be the wisest choice. But wisdom isn't on their short list.

KWIM?
Reply #17 from JoeUser Forums Top

Will they? In the words of the character in the Looney Tunes cartoons: eh! Could be.

I was surprised to hear that Johnson is now using the F word.  I would think after his close call he would at least keep his mouth shut.

Reply #18 from JoeUser Forums Top

KWIM?

?????

Reply #19 from JoeUser Forums Top
Know what I mean....KWIM.

KWIM?
Reply #20 from JoeUser Forums Top

Know what I mean....KWIM.

KWIM?

I do now!  Thanks.

Reply #21 from JoeUser Forums Top
I simply cannot understand the logic of standing by watching "while Rome burns." As an American, if you value your civil liberties, if you value your privacy, and especially if you value your individualism, you should be more than upset by this nomination, and be willing to take up arms against it. There is no "just getting along" with the ultra-conservative, religious Repubican base who are determined to shove their morality and their evangelism down everyone elses' throat. You forget they are on a "mission from God"; everything else, the Constitution included, comes second. Why is everyone just clammoring for the Senate to be a rubber stamp for Bush. If the nuclear option is adopted, members of the minority party might as well not even bother attending the Congressional Sessions for they will be so stifled that they will have absolutely no method of even representing a "minority" viewpoint. Adoption of the no filabuster rule would essentially establish and ordain one party rule in America. Then we can all sit back and wonder why we didn't act while we had the chance to.
Reply #22 from JoeUser Forums Top
Well-phrased title, Doc. .

Of course, Democrats who feel their best interests threatened by this candidate should attempt a filibuster. Will they be successful?

Doubtful.

I think the writing is on the wall with this one and moderate and / or right leaning Dems will go along with this candidate for no other reason then to avoid getting 'slimed'.
Reply #23 from JoeUser Forums Top
If the nuclear option is adopted, members of the minority party might as well not even bother attending the Congressional Sessions for they will be so stifled that they will have absolutely no method of even representing a "minority" viewpoint. Adoption of the no filabuster rule would essentially establish and ordain one party rule in America. Then we can all sit back and wonder why we didn't act while we had the chance to.


Hey Jimmy the lib.....You seem to have missed a MAJOR point. The ONLY thing that's being asked of dems is a "simple" up or down vote. Yes or No! See real simple. Why the filibuster? I'll tell you why. Because the dems "know" they can't bring enough votes to bear on the issue to shut the republicans up.
Reply #24 from JoeUser Forums Top

There is no "just getting along" with the ultra-conservative, religious Repubican base who are determined to shove their morality and their evangelism down everyone elses' throat.

This is not debating the merits of Alito.  Please take your ignorant diatribe to another site.  This is a simple question.  Should the democrats filibuster him.  Yes or no.  I did not say vote against him, I said Filibuster him.  Please stay on topic in the future.

Reply #25 from JoeUser Forums Top

Of course, Democrats who feel their best interests threatened by this candidate should attempt a filibuster. Will they be successful?

Doubtful.

It really is a 2 edged sword.  If they do attempt it, they risk being marginalized as long as they are the minority. 

So we have a doubtful.  Great answer too.