Thanks in advance Charles Schumer...

You are about to force the Nuk-u-lar option

from JoeUser Forums
Just a thanks in advance to Charles "Chuckie" Schumer, the [dis]honorable Senator from the [not so fine as long as he represents them] State of New York...

Chuckie warned over the weekend and early on Monday that depending upon how Samuel Alito answers the "abortion" question in his testimony in the Senate confirmation hearings the option to filibuster was still looking quite good. If that is the case, then the gang of 14 and their vaunted agreement will be out the window, and the nuclear option will come to pass.

So, Chuckie, let me be one of the first to say thanks. Thank you for inspiring the use of the nuclear option in the Senate. The log-jam that was advice and consent will become a rubber stamp by the conservative majority, and Chuckie, Hillary (some would say Shrill-her-y), Teddy "hic" Kennedy, and even good ol' Arlen Specter will have marginalized themselves into oblivion.

The fights over Janice Rogers Brown and others, gone. In place will be hearings and votes that are straight or close to straight party line, with cries from the minority that their voices are not being heard and that the administration is making a mockery and a sham of the judiciary. There will be cries that civil rights will be trampled, that abortion will become a back alley happening, and doctors will fear performing necessary procedures. And all of that will be the result of Chuckie failing to control his mouth, and failing to remind himself that abortion, nor any single issue, should be a litmus test for approval of a Supreme Court nominee.

Yup, thanks in advance Chuckie. Please, please, please... I beg you and your foolish party mates, please filibuster.

As I say that, just don't think of "Don't throw me into that briar patch," as I really wouldn't want you to change your mind before it's too late.
politics
4,121 views 12 replies
Reply #1 from JoeUser Forums Top
As he prepares to write plenty of letters to the conservatives sitting on the nuclear button in the Senate, here's a nice forum bump.
Reply #2 from JoeUser Forums Top

As I say that, just don't think of "Don't throw me into that briar patch," as I really wouldn't want you to change your mind before it's too late.

A very appropriate sign off statement!  Looks like Brer Rabbit (Bush) has out foxed Brer Bear and Brer Fox again!

Start11 - Customize the Start Menu and Taskbar in Windows 10/11.
Reply #3 from JoeUser Forums Top
Another contribution from the party of stupidity.
Reply #4 from JoeUser Forums Top
MM says nuke-em.. nuke-em all.
Reply #5 from JoeUser Forums Top
I watched the interview myself. Schumer did not say that the abortion issue in and of itself would cause a filibuster. He clearly said that if Alito refuses to answer questions on several issues then filibuster would be considered.
Reply #6 from JoeUser Forums Top
They can't force him to disclose in advance how he would vote on a specific issue, and they shouldn't ask him to, but that won't deter them. Never mind that when the situation was reversed (Ginsburg), such answers were not demanded and no filibuster was mounted by the Republicans. The Dems are desperate, scared shitless and prepared to do anything, constitutional processes & Senate precedent be damned, to bail themselves out.

Cheers,
Daiwa
Reply #7 from JoeUser Forums Top
Schumer did not say that the abortion issue in and of itself would cause a filibuster. He clearly said that if Alito refuses to answer questions on several issues then filibuster would be considered.


But I think the point of this article was that if Schumer or anyone else is going to filibuster, bring it. The act in itself is incendiary to the ridiculous "Gang of 12" agreement, and invoking the nuclear option will show the Dems who is really in charge on the Hill.
Reply #8 from JoeUser Forums Top
Schumer likes to take every opportunity to prove that he has no idea what the Senate or the Supreme Court is all about. Apparently he thinks that the Supreme Court is an issues oriented entity.

Sen. Schumer, read the Constitution sometime, you'll be surprised at how wrong you are... about everything!!
Reply #9 from JoeUser Forums Top
I watched the interview myself. Schumer did not say that the abortion issue in and of itself would cause a filibuster. He clearly said that if Alito refuses to answer questions on several issues then filibuster would be considered.


He lied out his butt to boot!


QUESTION: And how does that fit with what President Clinton did?

SCHUMER: OK. My rule is this. I understand that the president isn't going to nominate someone who would agree with me on every issue. I voted for close to 200 judges that that president has nominated who don't.


What a LIAR! GW has not nominated anywhere near 200 judges!

I'm here to say that the dems will filibuster Alito. And when they do the republicans will trigger the nuclear option!
Reply #10 from JoeUser Forums Top
But I think the point of this article was that if Schumer or anyone else is going to filibuster, bring it.


Exactly. Please, if Schumer, or anyone else on that side of the aisle, wants a filibuster here, bring it on. They will most seriously have no one but themselves to blame for marginalizing themselves out of existence, and I'll be doing a very happy dance at that point as judges that are smart enough to actually interpret law are on the bench, rather than having a bunch that find new law where non existed, or make up the rules as they go.
Reply #11 from JoeUser Forums Top
What a LIAR! GW has not nominated anywhere near 200 judges!


Actually, technically I don't think it's a lie, it's just part of the hypocrisy that Schumer and company want to propogate among the public. They have voted for loads of G.W. Bush's nominees, but not the important ones. They've rubber stamped the ones at lower levels, but anything at the appeals court level or higher, they refuse to go along with because they know that is where the decisions they favor will be over-ruled and over-turned.

They have no problem letting someone that could be easily over-turned on appeal make it to the bench, but they are scared s-it-less that that someone who won't be over-turned will land on one of the higher courts. If that happens, they know the precedents that will be set, and they'll lose in the last remaining battleground. God forbid that would happen. Oooops, wait, I forgot liberals don't believe in or need god. But you get the point.
Reply #12 from JoeUser Forums Top
Here's a news reference for some of the hyperbole that is referenced in the original comments above.

Link

Schumer warns of filibuster of Alito

By Charles Hurt
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
January 9, 2006

Democrats said yesterday that they may block the Supreme Court nomination of Judge Samuel A. Alito Jr., depending on the answers the nominee gives at his Senate Judiciary Committee confirmation hearings, which begin today.
Sen. Charles E. Schumer, New York Democrat and a member of the committee, said that if Judge Alito refuses to answer questions on issues that Democrats deem vital, the party will be more likely to block the nomination.
"If he continuously, given his previous record, refused to answer questions and hid behind 'I can't answer this because it might come before me,' it would increase the chances of a filibuster," Mr. Schumer said.
Also yesterday, another Judiciary Committee Democrat said she would likely block the nomination if she concludes that Judge Alito would overturn Roe v. Wade, the 1973 Supreme Court decision that declared abortion a constitutional right.
"If I believed he was going to go in there and overthrow Roe ... most likely 'yes,'" said Sen. Dianne Feinstein, California Democrat, when asked on "Fox News Sunday" whether she would filibuster the nomination.
In 1985, Judge Alito wrote an application essay for a job in the Reagan administration, saying the Constitution contains no right to abortion.


Note the highlighted comments from Fienstein.