looks like there will NOT be a filibuster

[welshTerrier2]

i've thought all along that the Dems would filibuster ... they cannot allow this to just happen ... this nomination is all about abuse of power by the executive branch ... many believe we are sitting on the precipice of tyranny ...

but i just listened to Kerry's floor speech and he said that he was concerned about Alito shifting the Court to the right but "i hope i'm proven wrong" ...

i would assume, at this point in the process, that Kerry would know what the Democratic strategy is ... if the Democrats planned a filibuster, it's hard to imagine he would be unaware of it at this late date ...

so, reading into the words he used, "i hope i'm proven wrong", it seems, at least to me, that he was acknowledging that the Democrats will not try to block Alito from being confirmed ... the words "i hope i'm proven wrong" seem to be saying "i hope i'm proven wrong when Alito takes his seat on the Court" ...

is there any other realistic way to interpret Kerry's statement?

[hippiechick]

1. ... and you're surprised ?

:shrug:

[rodeodance]

2. I had the gut feeling last week that there would be NO filly, but

"I could be proven wrong"

[samhsarah]

3. I caught that too.

I was hoping against hope also. Have you seen this thread yet? http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x238113

Remember that thread I started the other day and you disagreed with me? Well I gotta tell you, no more efforts at unity. I'm done. I was leaning toward your views to begin with, just trying to put that aside in the efforts of uniting to support Dems. Fuck it. When they learn how to unite to support us, maybe, but I won't hold my breath, Until then, I'm with you, Welsh.

[welshTerrier2]

5. i do remember our discussion ... i valued it ...

however frustrated we get, i think we still have to be willing to work for unity ... work for it; not cave in to it or demand it ... unity has to be earned ...

the "political class" has become estranged from their own constituents; the constituents have far too little access and far too little say in the affairs of state ...

it doesn't matter if someone says they will leave the party ... and it doesn't matter what names they are called by blind loyalists for doing so ... all that matters is that a vote is lost ... all that matters is that an honest discussion did not take place due to flawed processes ... all that matters is that the process of democracy came up a bit short ...

my position is to promote dialog and exchange ... this becomes impossible when our elected reps and Senators rarely return to their districts to hold free, public forums ... without communication, without a real exchange of ideas in a genuine two-way process, we have little hope of finding common ground and building the political force we need to make badly needed changes ...

this is not about being against Democrats and it's not about being for Democrats ... it's about doing a better job promoting democracy ... give people a real voice in the process and do a better job educating them to your beliefs, and political success will follow ...

[samhsarah]

7. you're very insightful, welsh...

thanks.

[Marnieworld]

4. It could be a bluff ya know

I will hold out hope for a filibuster until there is an actual vote. What will it take to get these people to fight?

[welshTerrier2]

8. i'm with you all the way ...

i proudly where the cloak of a naive optimist ... maybe it's all part of the "big plan" ... maybe the good guys have a trick or two up their sleeves ... that's what i've been thinking and hoping for all along ...

still, Kerry's comments, unless intentionally designed to misdirect, seemed somewhat conclusive ...

i'm with you all the way on this, though ... i will hold out hope until the reality leaves no handles to grab onto for support ...

[Doctor_J]

6. Raise the white flag -

they just signed off on * and all the damage he's done over the past five years. His incompetence, lying, crime have just been approved. What a shame that oue Senators have decided a dictatorship is the right thing for America.

[QC]

9. Kerry timid? I'm stunned!

Who ever could have imagined such a thing?!?!

[blm]

10. Kerry was one of the few Dems who said he WOULD support a filibuster.

He also asked us to URGE other senators to support one, too. Harry Reid and the Judiciary Dems aren't filibustering, and apparantly don't have enough Dems to launch a filibuster.

Why is the blame being attached to one of the few Dems who publicly STATED that he would support the filibuster?

Sometimes people MAKE themselves sound dumb when they really mean to sound cool in an exasoerated fashion.

[QC]

11. Sounds like he's not willing to lead a filibuster, doesn't it?

Why not? It's not as though Kerry has to worry about not being re-elected to his very safe senate seat, and he has roughly a snowball's chance in hell of ever being president, so why not throw caution to the wind and actually fight?

[blm]

12. Outside protocol....if the numbers aren't there and that is known, any

senator not on the judiciary who calls for a filibuster will be excoriated as a grandstander looking out for their own interests above the party. And would royally piss off every Judiciary member.

Let's see what Reid and other judiciaries decide first before we cast stones on Dems who already said they would support a filibuster.

[Blaukraut]

15. JK can't lead a filibuster

if there aren't enough votes against cloture (41). The no votes during cloture mean just that- not agreeing to move onto the confirmation vote. Votes in favor of filibuster, if you will.
As of right now, there aren't. While all Dems except Nelson, NE will foreseeably vote against confirmation, not all of them are going to vote against cloture.
Only after cloture is voted down, can a filibuster begin. At that point, I would assume that any Senator can filibuster.
However, a lot of people here assume that any Dem senator worth his vote should now jump up and declare he will filibuster and go from there. Unfortunately, it doesn't work that way.

[ProSense]

13. It's all about Kerry.

You know he's the entire Democratic Party.<sarcasm>

Expect this from the detractors everytime: Save me Kerry, save me; otherwise I'll keep talking about you (untrue it will go on forever).

[blm]

14. It's the stupidity of the attack that bugs me. Filibuster isn't a one-man

show for entertainment purposes or solidifying a base. It's a numbers game that requires at least 4o other people than John Kerry who already stated he was FOR a filibuster.

[Blaukraut]

16. I suspect

That a lot of people here do not understand the filibuster procedure, as evidenced by some posts. We will not know if there will be a filibuster until the cloture vote comes up, it's as simple as that.

[blm]

17. Sometimes DU can feel like Free Republic. Freepers think they know it all

and make the most dumbass accusations all the time. Every now and then, here at DU, you couldn't tell the difference between the two boards.

[QC]

23. And some people here are every bit as smug as the worst freepers.

Some are even given to extremes of fangurly hero worship that would embarrass the freepers. Not that I'm thinking of anyone in particular or anything....

My point, of course, was that Kerry is perfectly free to call for a filibuster, challenge his fellow Democratic senators to stop Alito, etc. I am quite well aware that the days are past when a senator can simply recite the phone book through the night.

In the past, I have caught some flack here for arguing that there was no real reason to try to block Robert, for example, or that grand, meaningless gestures weren't worth a whole lot. But it is hard to imagine a bigger menace to this country right now than Alito, and the fact that 41 senators can't stand together to block him is an absolute disgrace. If they can't act now, in the face of such an obvious threat, then what in the hell good are these people?

[blm]

24. I admire people who effect history positively. Why shouldn't I?

Some people admire movie stars or sports figures. I admire the man who investigated and exposed more government corruption than any lawmaker in modern history. Why should that be embarrassing for anyone here at DU?

A better question is why isn't a man who effected history so positively not admired?

[QC]

26. I used to admire John Kerry and was pleased to have him for a nominee.

Then he allowed the Bush campaign to attack his character without taking a hit in return (just like Dukakis did sixteen years earlier). And then there was the matter of folding faster than Superman on laundry day while evidence of fraud was coming out in Ohio and elsewhere. It appeared that Kerry wanted to be president, as long as he didn't have to fight for it. Now he wants Alito stopped, so long as he doesn't have to fight for it.

I guess I'm just disillusioned with these people. I've been a staunch Democrat since I turned eighteen, but I am beginning to think that no one has the guts to stand up to this drunken cretin who has declared himself our dictator. I honestly fear that if Alito makes it to the SC, we will have hit the tipping point and there's no use even caring anymore.

[blm]

32. Take a trip to the research forum. Kerry did what was appropriate against

the Swiftliars, but media chose to not give his defense of himself and his attack on the swifties the airtime. Most likely because he did it at a speech to the FIREFIGHTERS" CONVENTION which BushInc, no doubt, wouldn't want covered, so nobody covered it but Cspan.

And I blame the leftleaning media and Dem pundits. They should have defined it as Kerry had machine guns, bazookas and shoulder rockets pointed at him, and he wasn't going to be bothered as much or whine on forever about a gang of partisans lying to keep a draft dodger in office. They didn't. They couldn't tell the truth as effectively or with the gusto that RW machine can lie. And the pundits and DNC spokepeople are supposed to be our front line of defense in the daily communications battle.

Kerry's problem after the vote was that he had a DNC chair that doesn't believe in machine fraud and an Ohio Dem committee that wasn't prepared for machine fraud, either. Alot of people don't know this, but Kerry had Gore's vote fraud people working and the only area they were mostly looking out for was vote suppression tricks, not machine fraud. And the few talking to him about machine fraud knew that the machines would yield no evidence as those that were rigged were set up for one-time use and erased.

Machines need securing BEFORE elections, because after is too late. The DNC needs leaders who believe in machine fraud, and the next nominee better believe in machine fraud, too.

Listen, QC, I get as cynical as anyone here at times - heck, I used to work in the music business, I know cutthroat and dirty backstabbing as well as anyone - but, I am too determined to fight the corruption in govt. wherever I can and getting behind those who I know want a transparent government with open records is the best way to do it.

[karynnj]

33. Consider what he did - He said he would vote for a filibuster

before anyone else did. (He may still be the only one.)

Having his office say this, lets others do it without being first. It also sounds like the issue came up in their caucus. I assume talking about what happened in the Caucus is not done, but nothing was said. It sounds like he DID lobby others to do this. Whether others are trying to persuade people is not known.

At this point he has done as much as any one. The rather lame hearings are more to blame than anything done or not done by a Senator not on the committee.

[QC]

35. You and blm are right. My frustration has made me catty.

Not that it takes much to do that.

[enough already]

57. Perhaps because he apparently said he would filibuster....

....before deciding not to?

You know, Kerry IS allowed to start it himself, rather than wait for someone else to do it.

[blm]

61. Not without knowing there were 40 other votes against cloture.

Barring that, Kerry would get a half hour to announce he was filibustering and then get a week of round the clock criticism of everyone including Dems saying that he was showboating for the base, because he knew he didn't have the 40 other votes against cloture.

[enough already]

64. So we need to care what our enemies think, even knowing they are liars?

A true profile in courage.

[blm]

68. He's doing what he can behind the scenes but the senate is not where

armtwisting takes place.

What you and others are doing is acting unreasonably against the ONE person working to wrangle more votes against cloture, when iyt isn't even his perview to do so - it should be the Judiciary Committee Dems doing it.

Feingold should since he also voted for Roberts and could make up for it with an Alito filibuster - Kerry and a few others already said they would support one.

If they don't come forward it's because they absolutely do NOT have the votes.

[calimary]

63. Why wouldn't he just flat out LEAD a filibuster? If he supports it, why

couldn't he DO it? You only need one, don't you?

[LittleClarkie]

18. He'll vote against cloture, I'm sure

But he may already know that there won't be enough voting with him.

I wonder how the petition signing is going. It would have been nice if he got a "blow your socks off" number. I haven't heard yet though.

One vote for cloture does not a fillibuster make, sadly.

As for interpreting his words, I think you're trying to squeeze more meaning out of a few words than may have been intended.

I'd rather keep calling and/or fighting until the actual vote happens. Or is everyone ready to give up today?

Reid is the one we need to pressure, I think. He's the one who can corral the votes, or not. Otherwise there will be a minority of Dem Senators standing all by their lonesome in a nay vote re: cloture.

[alcibiades_mystery]

19. You thought there would be a filibuster?

What planet are you currently inhabiting?

[Dr Fate]

22. I know, I mean all you have to do is look at recent party history.

Since when do the party leaders listen to a damn word the base says?

The ignorance of these people!!!

Now- its time to gear up for those "battles to come" where we will finally get to use our dry powder!!!!

[alcibiades_mystery]

43. The point is

Your silly idealism about a filibuster is once again turning into a disappointing reality for you. I know you love your asinine dry powder line, love it like it was your precious baby, but at the end of the day, you know I'm right, and that your idealism is good as a wish, but does nothing to describe what is happening or what will happen. So sorry for you. On the bright side, at least you have your bitter comedy. Throw a few more posts about dry powder up. I'm sure they'll give you a few laughs, and continue to do nothing to either describe or change reality. Cheers, powder boy.

[Dr Fate]

47. No way!!! I agreed with you from the very beginning!

We both knew the Democrats would give Bush what he wants, like always.

I was never idealistic and I did indeed know you were right.

Now on to the "next battle" that we wont fight- I'm sure we will both be right about that too.

If you don't like the powder talking point, blame the DLC people who concocted it as a "comforting talking point" for when we refused to fight the Roberts confirmation.

Remember? We were told to "keep our powder dry" for "the next time"- I'm sure we both knew that was B.S. too.

Idealism? I've been accused of a lot of things on DU- but THAT is a first!

[jonnyblitz]

34. I never thought for a single minute they would. nt

[Neil Lisst]

20. There will be no filibuster. They've decided to vote NO, and sit down.

Our Democratic senators have decided they do not have the votes to sustain cloture. We know Landrieu, Nelson, and Lautenberg are lost votes. Others who have been quiet suggest they would not stand up for filibuster.

This is a "duck and cover" move by Dem senators, each one doing what they think will buy them the most peace at home. They vote NO so they can tell their base "I voted against it." But they don't filibuster, so as not to offend anyone not in their base. The sad truth is that most voters don't "get it."

I wanted to see a filibuster, and I think they're cowards for not filibustering. My cartoon tomorrow anticipated this, and will say as much.

[BigYawn]

46. Please read post #44

[Neil Lisst]

54. I read it, and fortunately, I know BS when I see it. n/t

[nancyharris]

21. If Kerry can't convince (lead) 41 Democratic Senators

into a filibuster against Alito, how does he expect people to believe he can lead a divided country?

Time for Kerry to "Report for Duty"

[blm]

25. Sad that people think the senate works like that. The JUDICIARY COMMITTEE

Dems and the senate leader take the lead on filibusters of court nominees.

Kerry has led filibusters appropriate to his committee duties. he's not on the Judiciary.

Why aren't people saying Feingold and other Judiciary Dems lead a filibuster when they are actually ON the judiciary committee?

I would bet that most judiciary committee members would blow a gasket if any other senator stood up to lead a filibuster on a court nominee. That person would be condemned as a showboater and grandstander, because if the votes were there, Harry Reid or one of the JCDems would lead a filibuster.

[nancyharris]

36. Sad??????

Sad that I think the man I voted for, the man I sent money to, the man I spent hours upon hours working for, would have the courage to LEAD?????????

DAMN RIGHT ITS SAD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[blm]

37. He's not on the judiciary committee and he's not minority leader. He said

he will filibuster. A filibuster is a 41 person show, not a one-man show. It hasn't been a one-man show for over THIRTY YEARS NOW!


The anger directed at Kerry on this is misplaced, as he has done everything he can do up to this point.

[nancyharris]

39. You just don't "get it"

I know it takes 41 senators to filibuster (I said that in my original post)

However, Every movement requires a leader - some one who will be looked at by the public as the lighting rod for an idea or a movement. Sorry, but I EXPECT that leadership of John Kerry. He is the one American Democrats have chosen as the Party's leader. I didn't vote for Reid or Leahy. (in fact only a minuscule number of Democrats voted for these guys (Vermont and Nevada). I EXPECT Kerry to lead. I expect him to MOVE the issue of filibustering the Alito nomination. I expect him to ACT!

Perhaps you are content to see Reid and Leahy flounder and sputter and eventually fail - I'm NOT! I want a leader

[LittleClarkie]

48. Their leader is Reid.

He's the one we need to pressure.

We failed in our attempt to get Kerry more authority than he has as a Senator.

If he were Minority Leader, your comparison might work. He is not.

I did try before Reid was picked mind you. I think I got up to the "O's" in the Senate directory before Reid was picked.

However, the leader is, and remains in the Senate, Reid.

So if you want a fillibuster, sic Reid.

[nancyharris]

51. So when Reid fails to lead a filibuster

I suppose you will sigh and say "Oh Well", he tried but didn't have the votes....Maybe next time....
Reid is a minor blue state politician from a state with fewer Democrats than my Congressional district. He is in over his head. We NEED someone like Kerry to publicly lead this filibuster, publicly announce that he (if no one else has the courage) is CALLING on all senators to vote no on cloture. Then I expect him to actually CONVINCE the other senators that this is what is best for our country.

[blm]

60. Expect 8 senators on the judiciary panel to give him the finger for it.

Kerry would get his half hour of time announcing filibuster and get the next week of airwaves filled with how he showboated for the base when he KNEW there wasn't votes for a filibuster. Because, if there were enough, Reid would lead it or one of the Judiciary would lead it.

We. Don't. Know. Yet.

[nancyharris]

69. You seem to be under the mistaken impression that

it is all down to fate. Either the votes to filibuster are there or not.

Christ!.. no wonder we keep loosing elections.

Wake up! I expect Kerry (my senator) to DO something - I don't need another election speech. I expect him to convince those 8 senators that it is in America's best interest to filibuster the Alito nomination. If he cannot convince members of his OWN party then he is not the leader I thought he was. Perhaps I am wrong. Perhaps he is just another spineless politician that talks a good game but hasn't the courage to lead.

[blm]

59. You don't know what's happening. You don't know what Reid is doing.

Senators don't do armtwisting like they do in the house.

If Reid had the votes he will filibuster, or tap someone else to lead it in a tactical maneuver, like Jeffords.

But, one senator doesn't LEAD a filibuster in the dramatic sense you are saying. Nobody LEADS the senate except the senate leader.

[nancyharris]

73. Reid is doing "NOTHING"

Not only is he not leading a filibuster he is also unable to prevent senators from his OWN party from voting IN FAVOR of Alito's nomination.

Saying that "Senators don't do arm twisting like they do in the house" is ridiculous! Of course they arm-twist - they trade votes, they (at least the other side) vote in block and support each other out of party loyalty or out of party persuasion.

I suggest that YOU don't know what's happening - or you don't want to believe what's happening.

ONE SENATOR CAN LEAD - If her or she has the courage to do so.

[TayTay]

27. Kerry said he would support a vote against cloture

That is a filibuster. He said this on the weekend. He's not the problem. Sen. Landreiu of LA and Sen. Salazar of CO and others will not do it. What part of that is hard to understand. Also, the leadership (Sen. Reid of NV and Sen. Durbin of IL) have released their Dems from having to follow a party line vote against Alito. Sen. Reid called it a vote of conscience and would not pressure other Sens to filibuster Alito.

I think you are barking up the wrong tree. I think we should applaud the people who tried to push for a filibuster and concentrate ire on those who didn't.

[Neil Lisst]

53. Yeah, I read it, and thought it was bs then, as well as now.

We're worried about the confirmation and you're trying to Swift Boat John Kerry? Why is THIS John Kerry's problem, but not Hillary's, or Evan Bayh's, or Joe Biden, or anyone else's?

What is your agenda?

[thatsrightimirish]

28. Oh well

I guess their waiting to use it for a Stevens retirement. I hope.

[Totally Committed]

29. I am so pissed off right now! This is BULLSH*T!

I am so goddammed tired of looking for one elected from this Party (Senate or House) unafraid enough to actually LEAD. There are so few, so few. Some bluster really big - "I'll SUPPORT a Fillibuster", others hide, others doubletalk or "spin" - "I won't vote for Cloture", but in the end, where are they all???? UNDER THE NEAREST F*CKING CHAIR KNEELING IN A PUDDLE OF THEIR OWN URINE. Oh, please, big, bad Bushies, don't hurt me.... I'll do anything you ask if I can just keep my job, please don't hurt me.....

No fillibuster? This is the beginning of the end of this Party and this country, my friends, and we voted for the slobs about to give it all away. F*CK THEM!

TC

[welshTerrier2]

30. many in the center have not yet voted ... hmmmmm ...

interesting, isn't it??

i mean they probably didn't just forget there's a vote going on ... it's not all that likely that dinner "ran a little long" or that bad weather slowed their arrival ... weather knows no political spectrum ...

it's also curious that the republicans are poised right at 49 votes ... one would think they could easily push on to 50 anytime they wanted to ...

what does it all mean??

[blm]

38. Well, if the thread runs true to form, it means that Kerry's to blame some

how and in some way.

[kerrygoddess]

41. The debate is intended to go on tomorrow as well

I know DiFi is slated for tomorrow morning - per her office. They are going through the entire body of the Senate letting them all speak.

[welshTerrier2]

42. i wonder if those in the middle are "negotiating"

or perhaps they're meeting to review the transcripts from the hearings ...

it just seems like it has to be more than coincidence looking at the political leanings of many who have not yet voted ...

[kaye45]

58. cloture and Lieberman

I am a CT voter, and I called Sen. Lieberman's office this morning - the live person on the other end said the majority of calls were for Lieberman to support a filibuster and not vote for cloture. I only hope he listens. I told the staffer I would take Lieberman's vote into consideration if he has a primary challenger in Connecticut.

[BigYawn]

45. Then Darth Cheney will appear like count Dracula out of the coffin...n/t

[thatsrightimirish]

31. If Snowe votes for him

She should go down in 2006. Her "Centrist" recored should be thrown out the window.

[Wordie]

40. What about the Patriot Act?

I don't think a phrase used like that (Kerry's in the OP) is necessarily so revealing. People say things for a variety of reasons; we can't read Kerry's mind. I have to admit, the hope for a filibuster does not look so hot, especially now that Salazar has said he will not filibuster...

But I keep thinking of how the Dem Senators pulled off the halting (for the time being at least) of the Patriot Act at the very last minute. It was a beautiful moment. And what about when Reid shut down the Senate?

It would be tough to filibuster at this point, but maybe not impossible. A flood of phone calls and emails and faxes are the key, imho, if there is to be any hope at all.

[BigYawn]

44. Good! Cooler heads have prevailed, filibuster would have sucked all

the oxygen out of our WINNING issues for 2006. I can count
on my left hand fingers how many centrist voters would switch
democratic since a filibuster of judge Alito took place.

As for the repugs, I am willing to bet more of them would have
swarmed out of their rat holes in November to vote after witnessing
the food fight on Alito.

[radio4progressives]

49. are you kidding? you really don't get it , do you?

there maybe a few victories, in certain locals, but winning back the congress in 2006? nope. 2008? i seriuously doubt it, unless the electronic voting machine owners decide it's the Dem's turn, just to create the perception that we have a "two party" system and create the perception that we really do have "checks and balances".

Imagine, a True Democrat in the White House with the over reaching Executive Powers and priveledges...

do you really think the Neo fascists would ever allow THAT to happen, unless of course, the pre-selected Dem of choice was actually one of THEIR OWN?

Do you REALLY THINK that the confirmation of judge Alito will be a matter of relatively minor significance with respect to over reach executive authority, given what you know NOW???

Or are you thinking at all?

[adigal]

50. It's true - Americans love wimps

who won't stand up for anything. We can see that by the election of GWB after he totally screwed up everything he has touched, but never backs down.

(/snark off)

NOTHING else matters if the electorate see the Democrats as weak. Even if we lose, if we filibuster, we win.

[Neil Lisst]

55. Is this based upon your extensive experience in these matters?

Imagining that filibustering now will have an impact on November in terms of the actual votes is pure fantasy.

The election will depend on what happens in the months of Aug, Sep, and Oct. Period.

[welshTerrier2]

56. "Aug, Sep, and Oct."

and Nov ... sometimes that's the most important of all ...

[BigYawn]

70. Alright Neil, lets list the issues....

IMO Winning issues for dems:

>> Affordable Health Care for ALL

>> Protect Social Security from privatization

>> Helping the bottom 50% instead of giving taxcuts for the top
5% of earners

>> Improve environment, public lands, & sea.

>> Encourage alternate sources of energy

>> Women's right to choose

>> Planned exit from Iraq

>> Strong stand on illegal immigration ala gov. of AZ


Losing issues for dems:

>> Appearing obstructionists by filibustering Alito who
has been given A+ by the Bar Association and has a
history of sound judgement (That does not mean he is
as progressive as I would wish)

>> Abandon Iraq and withdraw troops immediately

>> No stand on Illegal immigration

OK, now let me hear yours!

[Neil Lisst]

74. None of that has anything to do with this issue, which is now moot.

Your premise was that filibustering would hurt in the election, which is a bogus premise, so get back off the rabbit trail you've taken.

It's moot now, as 5 Dems have defected on the VOTE, for there's no way to sustain the filibuster.

[Dr Fate]

66. Was that why we did not oppose invading Iraq as well?

Oh- no, we were "fooled" into voting for Iraq- I forgot.

[DoYouEverWonder]

52. If the GOD DAMN SOB DEMS

can not stop this nomination or even make a feeble attempt, then I will never support a single one of them. They can all go to hell.

[coldiggs]

62. I dont even think they will have the votes

[Snivi Yllom]

65. of course there will not be a filibuster

nothing to gain by it, as Frist will successfully engage the nuclear option to reach cloture

if you want to block judges, or better yet pick them, you have to win elections

[Dr Fate]

67. Frist's response is not the issue. DEMs could still put up a fight.

But of course, they will do what Frist wants and go down without even a wimper.

We will at least get those token "no" votes as a "bone" to the base though.

[BigYawn]

72. You hit it on the head, eom

[welshTerrier2]

71. a post mortem for this thread ...

first, and i want to be very clear on this point, my intent in posting this thread was solely to provide my personal, speculative inference from a single comment Kerry made during his speech on Alito yesterday ... i found it frustrating that only one person, who disagreed with my inference btw, actually commented on whether they agreed or disagreed that Kerry's statement was (or wasn't) indicative of what the Dems might do regarding a filibuster ...

this did not mean that i saw all the other discourse as hijacking the thread or thought it was inappropriate in any way ... it just wasn't responsive ...

What seems to have become the central topic is whether Kerry should or should not be expected to LEAD a filibuster ... some are demanding he should because that's what leadership is all about ... the main argument opposing this point of view is that calling for a filibuster should be the responsibility of Reid or at least someone on the Judiciary Committee ...

I will NOT engage in whether the focus should or should NOT be on any individual Senator ... in the context of this thread, I will NOT put any more burden for my views on this on Kerry any more than i would on any other Senator ... i would argue that if you believe that leadership demands that any single Senator should fight for a filibuster, you should argue that all those who voted "No" have a similar obligation to do so ...

Having said that, I do NOT accept the idea that Senators should merely defer to Reid or those on the Judiciary Committee ... the Judiciary argument is especially weak ... once the hearings ended, it was the responsibility of each and every Senator to fully educate themselves on the nominee and determine the best course of action ... this business of yielding to others because they participated in the hearings is not an excuse to abdicate their responsibilities ... if that were the case, we might as well just let the Committee vote stand and not report out the nomination to the full Senate ...

now, as for Reid making the call, again, i think leaders simply lead ... there is no room to stand on ceremony or tradition or titles ... Reid should be free to offer his counsel ... he should be free to make his case ... but Senators should represent their own views and the views of their constituents ... this does not mean they should automatically oppose Reid should they reach a different conclusion than he reaches ... if he makes political arguments, or any argument, that should be weighed ...

so, in the end, i agree with those who say that the Alito nomination is a fight worth fighting and that the Democrats cannot afford to do oppose a filibuster ... i agree with those who argue that failing to fight for a filibuster demonstrates a clear failure to lead ... but, and here's the surprise ending to all this, it is not at all clear that this hasn't been happening in the Democratic caucus ... one might still make a case that such leadership, by necessity, would have to include speaking out publically ... but in the narrow context of considering a filibuster, as opposed to articulating the best case against Alito in the public arena, i see no such requirement ... leadership by individual Senators is critically important right now ... arguments about deferring to the Judiciary Committee or to Reid are inadequate ... but in the end, judging without visibility into the Democratic caucus, in this specific situation, is judging without the facts ... it is wrong to conclude that those criticized for failing to lead have not in fact been leading ... we just don't know ...