Frist finger on ‘nuclear’ button

[NewJerseyDem]

http://www.thehill.com/news/051304/frist.aspx

Senate Republican leaders are considering rewriting the chamber’s rules to limit what they call Democratic obstructionism that has slowed the pace of work in the Senate to a trickle.

In particular, Republicans want to eliminate the ability of Democrats to filibuster consideration of the president’s executive and judicial-branch nominees, as well as bar filibusters that block the naming of conferees prior to House and Senate negotiations.

To do so, Senate GOP leaders are considering resorting to what they call the “constitutional option” and what Democrats deride as the “nuclear option” because they charge it would amount to a Republican declaration of all-out war against them.

Republicans say they must take drastic action because Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle (D-S.D.) has put a freeze on all judicial branch nominees and has vowed to allow conferences to go forward only on a case-by-case basis.

[Democat]

1. They think Bush is going to lose so they want to pack the courts

Democrats better fight this all the way until Bush is out of office!

[aquart]

16. Yes.

They're going to steal everything that isn't nailed down from now to November.

And it isn't just Bush's election they're worried about.

[NutritionFacts]

2. Oh shit

This REALLY makes me think they planned to get rid of Rummy.

Can you imagine if rummy resigns immediatly after they do this who bush could appoint with no threat of filibuster? Same for any judges my god...

[BayCityProgressive]

4. if they do this..

I hope they like it when Kerry wins and appoints a bunch of abortion and homo loving commies to every office of government....I can see Santorum screaming in the chamber now!

[NutritionFacts]

13. Only if

the repubs lose majority status - otherwise kerry is screwed.

They will probably change the rules back just before the election too if things look bad for them.

[NashVegas]

6. I Doubt They'd Filibuster a New SecDef

But they would pay a lot more attention to his credentials and writings than the BFEE would like, no doubt.

[NutritionFacts]

14. Really?

Depends on just what kind of fascist bush has in mind.

[NashVegas]

19. Doesn't Matter

We're at war; pulling a filibuster on the nomination of whomever will be running it would be strategically stupid. Not when proper vetting should remove any need to.

[NutritionFacts]

23. I see

Sounds like a daschle position if I've ever heard one.

[salin]

3. What Daschle is doing is nothing compared to the freeze that senator

"No" (Helms) and others did during the Clinton administration.

[Toucano]

7. Exactly.

They've had a huge majority nominations approved.

[Democat]

9. Democrats should be getting that message out to the public!

The right wing is winning the war of propaganda on judges.

[aquart]

17. That's what I don't understand about Republican brains:

The inability to conceive of turnabout, of consequences. Did they never imagine there'd be payback?

Because I certainly imagined it. But then, I also knew what would happen in Iraq.

[WannaJumpMyScooter]

20. Yeah. Are these the same idiots who blocked EVERYTHING

that the Clinton Admistration proposed for 8 years?

And, I guess the DNC will sit still for this one too, huh?

yeah, we need to reorginize something all right.

[havocmom]

5. Frist should take a cue from Hastert

and get it through his thick skull that doing the bidding of the junta will get him nowhere fast. If he goes for open warfare against the Dems, he will find out the nation has had enough junta crap shoved down its collective throats. The doctor will be OUT.

[NashVegas]

8. Nah, I Like it This Way

If Bush goes down in flames, I want Frist going right down with him.

[keopeli]

10. This is a fake Repub issue.

They can't change the constitution without a super majority. They can't change senate rules without being subject to a filibuster. And, most of all, the Dems have approved all but 4 of Bush* nominees as judges. Hardly obstructionism. The current session is deadlocked, not because Dems are being obstructionists, but because they can't get all of their Repubs in line. They need every single one to pass their irresponsible agenda, and they can't do it. So, they'll declare a political war and make it look like it is the fault of the Dems. They are deadlocked because our nation is in a crisis. They are deadlocked because their agenda is divisive.

Complain all you want, Dr. Frist, this doggy don't bite.

Keo

[NewJerseyDem]

11. I doubt they have the votes

Only 2 or 3 republicans have to switch sides on the vote to prevent the nuclear option from working. I'm sure that moderates like Chafee, Snowe and McCain will be reluctant to support the nuclear option and install right wing judges and the older senators like Warner, Specter and Stevens are both moderate and probably reluctant to change the traditions of the Senate.

[iamjoy]

12. Hypocrites!

They blocked Clinton's nominations. After Clinton was elected in 1992 then Senate Majority Leader Bob Dole said that the majority of the people hadn't voted for Clinton (with Perot in the race, Clinton got a plurality) and they would fight every step of the way, using the filibuster.

And they did, blocking nominations every chance they got.

Now, they are in control & suddenly filibusters are a bad idea.

Oh yeah, and Bush didn't even get a plurality of the vote.

I really dislike them sometimes.

[Gothmog]

15. Supreme Court opening may be coming

Both Rehnquist and O'Connor were rumored to be resigning last year. There is speculation that the both stayed on the bench because Rove did not want a divisive confirmation fight. If it looks like Bush is going to lose, I would not be surprised to see one or both resign and the GOP use the Nuke option to stop a filibuster to get two conservative nominees on before Bush leaves office.

A supreme court appointment is the only prize large enough to justify using the nuclear option and then that option only makes sense if Frist and Rove think that Bush is going to lose.

[Walt Starr]

18. That was my first thought, too.

One of them sent signals they were going to retire before the election.

[dusty64]

21. Well, I am more than

tired of this fascist bullshit. I hope this backfires mightily on these repuke bastards and that the wussy Democrats finally get it this time. It is WAR and it was started by the extreme right against the People and this Country years ago. They'd better not play this Mr. Nice Guy BS anymore and I hope payback is a severe bitch on these assholes after they lose the Senate this November.

[Hand]

22. Hey, catkiller...

I got yer finger RIGHT HERE!!!

(Damn, where's that fingers smiley? Oh well, you get the drift...)

:nuke:

[TahitiNut]

24. Senate Democrats represent 55.14% of America

The fascists want TOTAL control. They have the Executive, the Judicial, and both houses of Congress ... and that's still not enough for the greedy cucksockers. :grr:

[glitch]

32. crotchsockers! nt

[BattyDem]

25. So if one party, even if they are the majority party ...

can change the rules to completely eliminate opposition arguments, then our Democracy is truly lost. I say every Democrat in the House and Senate should boycott the Congress and stand on the steps of the Capitol Building EVERY DAY until the media covers the story and the sheeple become aware of the fascist tactics of the Repugs! This is total bullsh*t! They don't get their own way so they're going to change the rules that have governed our Democracy for over 200 years??
:wtf:

Hey Frist ... the reason the pace of the work in the Senate has slowed to a trickle is because you can your fascist party REFUSE to compromise or work with anyone who disagrees with you. You have completely abandoned your Constitutional duty in favor of party politics. You don't deserve to be the leader of the Senate - you're a disgrace to your country! :grr:

[BattyDem]

27. oops ...

The line should read "because you and your fascist party REFUSE to compromise ..."

I should never post an angry rant when I'm tired! :silly:

[dusty64]

26. An outraged

:kick:

[The Stranger]

28. "it would amount to a Republican declaration of all-out war against them."

Are they just now realizing that an all-out war has been declared against them?

Great. Just great.

[Bandit]

29. To combat something like this just don't show up for votes

Congress has to have a quorum before voting can happen. With no quorum no business can be conducted. Remember the brave democrats in Texas.

[ibegurpard]

33. this kind of bullshit calls for exactly that.

The rules can't just be re-written to suit the whims of whoever happens to be in power. If there is anything to hold the line on, this would be it.

[Zerex71]

30. What's good for the goose is good for the gander!

Yeah, now that the shoe's on the other foot, the Repubs don't like it, do they? Good. They deserve a taste of their own medicine, trying to be megalomaniacal powermongers all the time.

[loudsue]

31. I've been concerned bush would appoint someone during "recess"

I can see one of the r/w judges of the supreme court stepping down during a congressional "recess", and bush stepping in before they got back to town to appoint whomever he damn well pleases.

He's done it before.....!

:kick:

[Walt Starr]

34. Yeah, but it won't last long

Recess appointments only last until the next Congress is seated. Next congress is seated on January 3, 2005. No recess appointed Supreme court Justice could weigh in on a decision prior to having to leave.

[NewJerseyDem]

35. It would be politically disastrous

They are willing to do it on the Court of Appeals but the Supreme Court would be a huge deal and would backfire. Even some republican senators wouldn't like that. Also, the Congress is unlikely to be in recess much. The congress must be in recess for 11 or 12 days or so (I forget the exact number) for an appointment and the democrats will block any recess that long. The first recess appointment was a surprise and the second one was a mistake (Apparently Daschle and the democrats can't add well) but they'll be more careful next time.