Bitter Republicans Bitching About Defeat

[PalJoey]

Posted: 5/23/05 at 5:11pm

From the wonderful DailyKos.

Oh, wouldn't it be wonderful if we saw the Republican hegemony disintegrate again, like it did when Newt Gingrich's Contract ON America went down in flames?

---

Today brings the first whispers of "what if?" from the far right in this debate. Today's Roll Call (sorry, I can't provide the link as it's behind my Lexis/Nexis log in) features an article about how this fight will shape the future of the Republican party.

Buried at the bottom of the story is this extremely intriguing nugget:

A senior Senate Republican aide said Frist needs to spend the next 24 hours deciding if it is worth it personally to move forward with a vote even if he knows it will fail.

"If you go for this and lose, you have to say, 'What is the political fallout,'" said the aide to a conservative Senator, who spoke on the condition of anonymity. "Does it substantiate the Democrats' [argument] that we were overreaching and our own moderates proved it?"

A senior aide to a conservative Senator--presumably one that should be in Dobson's Frist's corner already--is let loose to suggest Dobson Frist might fail. I might be reading too much into it, but remember, this majority keeps a tight seal against leaks.


---

With 44 Democrats and the lone Independent, Sen. Jim Jeffords (Vt.), in Reid's corner, he needs to peel away six Republicans to preserve the minority's right to filibuster judicial nominations. So far, just three GOP Senators -- Lincoln Chafee (R.I.), John McCain (Ariz.) and Olympia Snowe (Maine) -- have publicly opposed the maneuver.

That leaves a handful of potential `no' votes for Reid to go after. He will need three of the five to prevail over Frist.

And most prominent among the undecided Senators are Armed Services Chairman Warner, who has taken a lead role in trying to derail Frist's effort and craft a compromise among centrists, and Judiciary Chairman Specter, who has been the most outspoken Senator pleading with Frist and Reid to stand back from the brink of the nuclear showdown [...]

In an interview with regional reporters from targeted states Friday, Reid said he had a private commitment from a fourth Republican to oppose the nuclear option but declined to name who that person was. He told the reporters that he had four GOP targets remaining, of which two will be needed to outflank Frist.

But Republicans have privately suspected that Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine), a moderate who has been actively engaged in the centrist talks, would join her home-state colleague Snowe in opposing the move.

The remaining GOP targets are Warner, Specter, DeWine and Sen. Chuck Hagel (Neb.), according to aides and liberal activists [...]

A few other Republicans remain outside prospects for `no' votes, including Sens. Lindsey Graham (S.C.) and Lisa Murkowski (Alaska). Both have participated in the centrist talks.

Murkowski's office said Friday she remains undecided.

Republicans Preparing for Filibuster Defeat?

Updated On: 5/24/05 at 05:11 PM

[PalJoey]

Posted: 5/23/05 at 11:01pm

OK so we won a pyrrhic victory in the "deal," preserving the filibuster but having to swallow homophobic judges like Pryor.

Only civil war would have yielded a better result.

But Senator Feingold reminds us not to become complacent with this deal: "This is not a good deal for the U.S. Senate or for the American people. Democrats should have stood together firmly against the bullying tactics of the Republican leadership abusing their power as they control both houses of Congress and the White House. Confirming unacceptable judicial nominations is simply a green light for the Bush administration to send more nominees who lack the judicial temperament or record to serve in these lifetime positions. I value the many traditions of the Senate, including the tradition of bipartisanship to forge consensus. I do not, however, value threatening to disregard an important Senate tradition, like occasional unlimited debate, when necessary. I respect all my colleagues very much who thought to end this playground squabble over judges, but I am disappointed in this deal."

Updated On: 5/23/05 at 11:01 PM

[brdlwyr]

Posted: 5/23/05 at 11:05pm

PJ - this will be the first (or Frist) vistory in battle towards vistory in the war!!!

[PalJoey]

Posted: 5/23/05 at 11:11pm

Well, at least their side is even more upset than we are.

----
Dobson Blasts Filibuster 'Betrayal'

5/23/2005 9:31:00 PM

To: National Desk

Contact: Christopher Norfleet of Focus on the Family

COLORADO SPRINGS, Colo., May 23 U.S. Newswire -- Focus on the Family Action Chairman Dr. James C. Dobson today issued the following statement, upon the announcement by members of the U.S. Senate that a "compromise" had been reached on the filibuster issue:

"This Senate agreement represents a complete bailout and betrayal by a cabal of Republicans and a great victory for united Democrats. Only three of President Bush's nominees will be given the courtesy of an up-or-down vote, and it's business as usual for all the rest. The rules that blocked conservative nominees remain in effect, and nothing of significance has changed. Justice Clarence Thomas, Justice Antonin Scalia, and Chief Justice William Rehnquist would never have served on the U. S. Supreme Court if this agreement had been in place during their confirmations. The unconstitutional filibuster survives in the arsenal of Senate liberals.

"We are grateful to Majority Leader Frist for courageously fighting to defend the vital principle of basic fairness. That principle has now gone down to defeat. We share the disappointment, outrage and sense of abandonment felt by millions of conservative Americans who helped put Republicans in power last November. I am certain that these voters will remember both Democrats and Republicans who betrayed their trust."

[brdlwyr]

Posted: 5/23/05 at 11:15pm

If you remove a few bricks over time the foundation will fall.

I do not want these jerks like Prior, but the real loser is Frist!

Ben Nelson is a surprising rising star of the Republican Party (oh he is a Democrat).

[PalJoey]

Posted: 5/23/05 at 11:18pm

Here's some info on the three judges they agreed to vote yes or no on:

* Justice Priscilla Owen has a consistent record of judicial activism in favor of corporations and against consumers and individual rights. Even her current and former colleagues have criticized her efforts to rewrite the law from the bench to impose her own beliefs.

* Justice Janice Rogers Brown has a record of hostility to workers’ rights and victims of discrimination. She said that 1937 (the year that the courts upheld New Deal legislation) "mark[ed] the triumph of our own socialist revolution."

* William Pryor is a leading architect of the recent "states’ rights" or "federalism" movement to limit the authority of Congress to enact laws protecting individual and other rights. He has advocated the view that the Constitution should not apply to some of the most critical issues pertaining to individual rights and freedoms — including reproductive choice, gay rights, and school prayer — and that these matters should be decided by the states, based on majority vote, regardless of whether constitutional rights are violated.

[bwaysinger]

Posted: 5/23/05 at 11:23pm

Wow. Someone, please, expose Dobson's homosexual relationships or something.
Never have I felt such hatred in a man for people who don't behave the way he thinks they should.

[PalJoey]

Posted: 5/24/05 at 8:17am

Another bitter Republican bitching about "betrayal," from the nasty GOPUSA website that first gave us White House P*ss Whore Jeff Gannon.

===

Senate RINOs Betray GOP
By Carol Devine-Molin
May 24, 2005

Ultimately, Republicans caved and 214 years of Senate tradition have been cast out the window. It appears that "judicial filibuster" is here to stay. In a deal struck with Senate Republicans, Democrats will be permitted to engage in filibuster of future judicial nominees under "extraordinary circumstances". Well what does that mean? It means that the Senate Democrats will utilize the judicial filibuster liberally and will continue in their obstructionist mode. The "nuclear option" - that would have banned judicial filibusters - was averted. Never mind that all decent Republicans felt that it was imperative to implement the "nuclear option" or "Constitutional option" as it's frequently dubbed.

Senator John McCain claims that this compromise with Senate Democrats was in the "finest traditions of the Senate." Personally, I'm sickened. That characterization is sure to sicken most grassroots Republicans as well. We know when we've been knifed in the back. Yep, this is the so-called bi-partisanship that the RINOs pride themselves on achieving. To these RINO Senators I ask, where are your principles? And is "judicial filibuster" even in keeping with the spirit of the Constitution and "advice and consent" of the Senate? I think not.

Senate RINOs Betray GOP

[bwaysinger]

Posted: 5/24/05 at 9:19am

Does that See You Next Tuesday even KNOW That filibustering IS indeed a 214 year tradition? Does she KNOW that Republicans have filibustered in the past? Does she know that,when the day comes that those same Republicans are suddenly out of power and need to stop some crazy, liberal, activist judge from taking over the Supreme Court, that THEY will be able to filibuster?
I'm awaiting that test so that they can stand by their morals and NOT filibuster.

[papalovesmambo]

Posted: 5/24/05 at 9:43am

just what are "extraordinary circumstances"? how will the democrats be able to justify filibustering janice rogers brown or pris owen when one of them's nominated to the supreme court this summer after this deal in which they'll get confirmed to the bench? "um, we were ok with them then, just not now..."

on its face it's a loss for both sides (more so for the some of the more frothy members of the gop), but a win for the country as it avoids the nucular option, but it does bind both sides hands somewhat which may not be such a bad thing.

all in all, it succeeds in passing the buck for a while. come supreme time it'll be up to the gop to convince the nation that their nominees are not the devil incarnate. the democrats will have to explain why they even got in a position to be nominated. wonder what the vote count on them'll be?

[PalJoey]

Posted: 5/24/05 at 10:00am

Dr. James C. Dobson, head of the Focus on the Family, one of the conservative groups that had made an end to judicial filibusters a top priority, said the agreement "represents a complete bailout and a betrayal by a cabal of Republicans and a great victory for united Democrats."

==

Giggle. Cabal is such a silly word. Giggle.

[bwaysinger]

Posted: 5/24/05 at 10:08am

I just find it amazing that someone like Dobson grabs that hard-line and touts it and THEN, when Republicans compromise (the TRUE spirit and tradition of Congress right there), they're a cabal of sellouts.
Wow.
Our country is ALWAYS at its best when the hard-liners fail and lose out to those who reach across and find agreement even in disagreement...not when psychos like Dobson get their way.

[brdlwyr]

Posted: 5/24/05 at 11:06am

Dobson is creepy!

[trpguyy]

Posted: 5/24/05 at 12:19pm

I think it's interesting how only conservative judges are "judicial activists," while liberal judges who unconstitutionally legistlate from the bench are not "activists."

[bwaysinger]

Posted: 5/24/05 at 12:20pm

Are you seriously kidding me with that?
Republicans coined the nifty little catchphrase of "Judicial Activism" to lambast judges who promote what they view as a liberal agenda.
Turnabout is fair play. You want to consistently favor big business or be anti-labor unions or whatever, get ready to be labelled an activist as well.

[Gothampc]

Posted: 5/24/05 at 1:00pm

"Justice Janice Rogers Brown has a record of hostility to workers’ rights and victims of discrimination. She said that 1937 (the year that the courts upheld New Deal legislation) "mark[ed] the triumph of our own socialist revolution."

Justice Brown got 76% of the vote in California. I guess all the liberals partied the night before and didn't wake up in time to vote against a conservative.

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 5/24/05 at 1:26pm

Sorry, your line is "But... but... but... BUT CLINTON!"

Take it from the top again, please.

[trpguyy]

Posted: 5/24/05 at 1:26pm

No, I'm asking why liberals do not recognize the actualt activist judges as activists. What are some examples of Bush's nominees' activism? What laws did they overturn, what new legistlation did they demand?

[jrb_actor]

Posted: 5/24/05 at 1:29pm

If progressing this nation on matters of civil rights is activism, then you may call me an activist all you like.

[bwaysinger]

Posted: 5/24/05 at 1:33pm

I like to think I am, too. Call me an activist all you like if, by activism, you mean I'm fighting for the rights of the many over the few.

[trpguyy]

Posted: 5/24/05 at 1:40pm

In that case, call me an activist for fighting for the millions of innocent children who are murded every year in the US.


But you didn't answer my question... Updated On: 5/24/05 at 01:40 PM

[bwaysinger]

Posted: 5/24/05 at 1:46pm

Are you fighting to bring to trial all the women who lose their babies (since it's a human from the moment of conception, right?) whose bodies reject those cells and they unknowingly flush their fully-alive babies down the toilet? At least go for manslaughter, man...

[trpguyy]

Posted: 5/24/05 at 1:52pm

Still didn't answer my question.

No, I wouldn't do that; that would be similar to posthumously putting a cancer patient on trial for suicide.


Intentionally killing a human being is an entirely different subject, and you know it. I thought the Democrats were the Party to stick up for the minorities and the under-represented. Where are they on this issue?

Actually, to answer my own question, the Democrats are slowly moving towards the Right on the abortion issue. Just listen to Billary. I don't believe a word she ever says, but she seems to be pandering to the Right now. Where are the feminist groups on this? How could they miss this one?
Updated On: 5/24/05 at 01:52 PM

[robbiej]

Posted: 5/24/05 at 1:58pm

This Democrat believes that the government has no right to force a woman to carry a pregnancy to term for any reason whatsoever.

This Democrat also believes that the 14th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America does guarantee my right to enter into a legally bound relationship with the adult of my choice...since no state shall make a law which shall abridge the privilieges or immunities of citizens of the United States nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

[bwaysinger]

Posted: 5/24/05 at 1:59pm

Again, you're blurring the definition of human.
So answer my question: you're on record as saying that you're fully human at the moment of conception but, if your wife's body decides to reject said fully human creation, that it's not murder?