How many of these 2005-2006 Bush judicial nominees did Obama vote against?

[draft_mario_cuomo]

Some prominent Obama supporters created a interesting new standard today. All lower court nominees must be voted against if you disagree with their ideology. Moreover, if you vote for someone who was appointed to a lower court 97-0 that means you would support that individual for the Supreme Court. So let's apply that thinking to Senator Obama. The following right-wingers were confirmed for district and appeals court positions from 2005-2006 alone. How many did Obama vote against?


Name Date of Hearing Date Confirmed

Barrett, Michael Ryan 3/29/06 5/1/06
Batten, Sr., Timothy C. 2/7/06 3/6/06
Besosa, Francisco Augusto 8/1/06 9/25/06
Bianco, Joseph Frank 11/1/05 12/21/05
Brown, Janice R. 10/23/03 6/8/05
Bumb, Renee Marie 4/25/06 6/6/06
Burgess, Timothy 11/1/05 12/21/05
Chagares, Michael 3/14/06 4/4/06
Cogan, Brian 3/29/06 5/4/06
Conrad, Robert 3/3/05 4/28/05
Cox, Sean F. 5/2/06 6/8/06
Crotty, Paul A. 11/16/04 4/11/05
Delgado-Colon, Aida M. 2/7/06 3/6/06
Dever, James 3/3/05 4/28/05
DuBose, Kristi 11/15/05 12/21/05
Gelpi, Gustavo A. 6/15/06 7/20/06
Golden, Thomas 3/29/06 5/4/06
Gordon, Leo Maury 2/7//06 3/13/06
Gorsuch, Neil M. 6/21//06 7/20/06
Griffin, Richard A. 6/16/04 6/9/05
Griffith, Thomas B. 3/8/05 6/14/05
Guilford, Andrew J. 5/24/06 6/22/06
Hillman, Noel Lawrence 4/25/06 6/8/06
Holmes, Jerome A. 6/15/06 7/25/06
Ikuta, Sandra Segal 5/2/06 6/19/06
Johnston, Thomas E. 2/7/06 3/6/06
Jordan III, Daniel Porter 6/15/06 7/20/06
Jordan, Kent A 9/6/06 12/8/06
Kavanaugh, Brett 5/9/06 5/26/06
Kendall, Virginia Mary 11/15/05 12/21/05
Larson, Stephen G. 2/15/06 3/16/06
Ludington, Thomas L 5/2/06 6/8/06
Mattice, Jr., Harry Sandlin 9/29/05 10/24/05
McKeague, David W. 6/16/04 6/9/05
Neilson, Susan Bieke 9/8/04 10/27/05
Miller, Gray 3/14/06 4/25/06
Moore, Kimberly 6/28/06 9/5/06
Owen, Priscilla Richman 3/13/03 5/25/05
Pryor, Jr., William H. 6/11/03 6/9/05
Sandoval, Brian Edward 9/29/05 10/24/05
Schiltz, Patrick Joseph 3/1/06 4/26/06
Seabright, J. Michael 11/16/04 4/27/05
Shepherd, Bobby E. 6/28/06 7/20/06
Sheridan, Peter G. 4/25/06 6/8/06
Smoak, John Richard 9/29/05 10/27/05
Smith, Milan 4/25/06 5/16/06
*Sweeney, Margaret Mary 9/29/05 10/21/05
**Tydingco-Gatewood, Frances 7/11/06 8/3/06
VanTatenhove, Gregory F. 11/1/05 12/21/05
Vitaliano, Eric Nicholas 11/1/05 12/21/05
Watkins, W. Keith 11/15/05 12/21/05
*Wheeler, Thomas Craig 9/29/05 10/21/05
Whitney, Frank DeArmon 5/24/06 6/22/06
Wigenton, Susan Davis 4/25/06 5/26/06
Zouhary, Jack 2/15/06 3/16/06

[Clintonista2]

1. I'll geuss first- zero?

**Waits for the bizarre rationalizing that will soon come from Obama supporters**

[draft_mario_cuomo]

53. Apparently it is 1

Janice Brown is the only exception.

[ecstatic]

2. How many did Edwards vote against

In his short office stay? Can you tell us what Edwards will do as opposed to your continuous Obama bashing?

[draft_mario_cuomo]

3. I'll be happy to tell you

99.99999% of district and appeals court judges sail through unanimously or with only literally a handful of "nay" votes (if this were not the case our federal judicial system would come to a halt because no lower court judges would get confirmed if the prez and senate majority were of different parties. The vast majority of federal cases are decided there.). For instance, John Roberts was confirmed with 0 no votes for the court of appeals in 2003. In 2005 he was opposed by many. Why? His jurisprudence had not changed from 2003 to 2005. The reason was he was nominated for the Supreme Court in 2005. The OP merely applies the interesting new standard created by a couple of prominent Obama supporters. Let's apply the BO fan logic to BO for once. ;)

[karynnj]

43. The problem is that this fight seemed to start because

"someone" :) spoke about Obama considering that he could vote for Roberts. His reasons are actually not that far from things stsated by some Senators voting no - Roberts was considerered brilliant and he was personable at the hearings. Some, like Feingold voted FOR him using exactly that reasoning. Many explained other reasons for not voting for him - such as the fact that there was virtually no public track record and Bush wouldn't release the opinions Roberts wrote for him and other Republican Presidents.

Then it was noted that Edwrads voted FOR confirmation while on the Judiciary committee for a lower level job - while Durbin and Kennedy voted against. Even as SCJ, Roberts got many Democratic votes. Judging from just those 2 observations, had the SCJ appointment been in 2003, I'm not 100% convinced how the 2003 Edwards would vote.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

4. zulch? jeff_dem? others? nt

[DURHAM D]

5. You won't get any response from BO supporters -

they are following their leader.

They just want to get along with you and everyone who opposes him/them.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

6. Are they hypocrites or just lying on the issue of lower court nominees? nt

[DURHAM D]

7. Actually I don't know what started this whole discussion

on lower court judges.

One thing I do know, their is a lot of faith involved in supporting Obama. Many of his supporters are young and have fallen in love with the candidate. That's ok - anything to get them interested.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

8. Obama fans think there is no difference between how voting for SCOTUS nominees and lower court...

...nominees work. They think a vote for a lower court nominee is the same as a vote for a Supreme Court nominee. They also believe a vote for a lower court nominee means you would vote for the same judge if he or she were appointed to the Supreme Court. Using their own faulty logic the only candidates who can be trusted with Supreme Court appointments are Bill Richardson and Dennis Kucinich since they never had to vote on lower court appointees. Their hero cannot be trusted because of his dozens of votes for right-wingers.

[DURHAM D]

9. Oh my -

some folks need a little education.

Obama supporters are in love and taking him on faith.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

12. Exactly. They think his record on this is different from that of Clinton, Edwards, or...

people ranging from Orrin Hatch, Tom Coburn to John Kerry and Bernie Sanders. The audacity of blind faith...

[FrenchieCat]

10. Shouldn't you be providing information in the OP as to which Obama voted for and against.....

or is that too much work for you that might take time away from your attacks? Your post implies that he voted for all of those listed, but the link doesn't say that. :shrug:


and in turning the tables, Edwards' confirmed which of these, or did he simply missed most of the votes while busy being a presidential candidate while sitting on that committee?
http://deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,595078450,00.html

Roger L. Gregory 7/11/01 7/20/01
Richard F. Cebull 7/11/01 7/20/01
Sam E. Haddon 7/11/01 7/20/01
William J. Riley 7/24/01 8/2/01
Sharon Prost 8/27/01 9/21/01
Reggie B. Walton 8/22/01 9/21/01
Barrington Parker 9/13/01 10/11/01
Michael Mills 9/13/01 10/11/01
Karen Caldwell 10/4/01 10/23/01
Laurie Camp 10/4/01 10/23/01
James Payne 10/4/01 10/23/01
Claire Eagan 10/4/01 10/23/01
Larry Hicks 10/18/01 11/5/01
Christina Armijo 10/18/01 11/6/01
Stephen Friot 10/18/01 11/6/01
Karon Bowdre 10/18/01 11/6/01
Terry Wooten 8/27/01 11/8/01
Edith Clement 10/4/01 11/13/01
Harris Hartz 10/25/01 12/6/01
Danny Reeves 11/7/01 12/6/01
Joe Heaton 11/7/01 12/6/01
Julie Robinson 11/7/01 12/11/01
Kurt Engelhardt 10/25/01 12/11/01
John Bates 10/25/01 12/11/01
Frederick Martone 11/7/01 12/13/01
Clay Land 11/7/01 12/13/01
William Johnson 10/25/01 12/13/01
C. Ashley Royal 12/5/01 12/20/01
Marcia Krieger 12/5/01 1/25/02
James Mahan 12/5/01 1/25/02
Callie Granade 12/5/01 2/4/02
Philip Martinez 12/5/01 2/5/02
Michael Melloy 1/24/02 2/11/02
Jay Zainey 1/24/02 2/11/02
David Bunning 12/10/01 2/14/02
James Gritzner 1/24/02 2/14/02
Richard Leon 1/24/02 2/14/02
Cindy Jorgenson 1/24/02 2/26/02
Robert Blackburn 1/24/02 2/26/02
Ralph Beistline 2/26/02 3/12/02
David Bury 2/26/02 3/15/02
Randy Crane 2/26/02 3/18/02
Terrence L. O'Brien 3/19/02 4/15/02
Lance M. Africk 3/19/02 4/17/02
Legrome D. Davis 3/19/02 4/18/02
Jeffery R. Howard 4/11/02 4/23/02
Percy Anderson 4/11/02 4/25/02
John F. Walter 4/11/02 4/25/02
Joan Lancaster 4/11/02 4/25/02
William Griesbach 4/11/02 4/25/02
Michael Baylson 4/11/02 4/30/02
Cynthia Rufe 4/11/02 4/30/02
Leonard Davis 4/25/02 5/9/02
Andrew Hanen 4/25/02 5/9/02
Samuel Mays 4/25/02 5/9/02
Thomas Rose 4/25/02 5/9/02
Paul Cassell 3/19/02 5/13/02
Lavenski Smith 5/23/02 7/15/02
Richard Clifton 5/9/02 7/19/02
Christopher Conner 5/9/02 7/26/02
Julia Gibbons 4/25/02 7/29/02
Joy Conti 5/9/02 7/29/02
John Jones 5/9/02 7/29/02
D. Brooks Smith 2/26/02 7/31/02
Henry Autrey 5/23/02 8/1/02
Richard Dorr 5/23/02 8/1/02
Henry Hudson 5/23/02 8/1/02
David Godbey 4/25/02 8/1/02
Amy St. Eve 5/23/02 8/1/02
David Cercone 6/13/02 8/1/02
Morrison England 6/13/02 8/1/02
Timothy Savage 5/23/02 8/1/02
Terrence McVerry 6/27/02 9/3/02
Kenneth Marra 6/13/02 9/9/02
Timothy Corrigan 7/23/02 9/12/02
Jose Martinez 7/23/02 9/13/02
Arthur Schwab 6/27/02 9/13/02
Reena Raggi 8/1/02 9/20/02
James Gardner 8/1/02 10/2/02
Ronald Clark 8/1/02 10/2/02
Larry Block 8/1/02 10/2/02
John Rogers 6/13/02 11/14/02
Stanley Chesler 9/26/02 11/14/02
William Martini 9/18/02 11/14/02
Ronald Leighton 10/7/02 11/14/02
Daniel Hovland 9/26/02 11/14/02
Thomas Phillips 9/18/02 11/14/02
Linda Reade 9/26/02 11/14/02
Alia Ludlum 9/18/02 11/14/02
Robert Klausner 10/7/02 11/14/02
James Kinkeade 9/26/02 11/14/02
William Smith 10/7/02 11/14/02
Jeffrey White 9/18/02 11/14/02
Kent Jordan 9/18/02 11/14/02
Mark Fuller 10/7/02 11/14/02
Rosemary Collyer 10/7/02 11/14/02
Robert Kugler 10/7/02 11/14/02
Jose Linares 10/7/02 11/14/02
Freda Wolfson 9/26/02 11/14/02
Michael McConnell 9/18/02 11/15/02
Dennis Shedd 6/27/02 11/19/02
http://www.usdoj.gov/olp/confirmed107.htm

and then some!

What we do know is that Edwards voted for Roberts twice! That, we do know!

Edwards Voted for John Roberts (yes, the current Chief Justice) to the Appeals Courts back in 2003--
back in 2003, when Roberts was confirmed for a seat on the federal courts of appeals, just three committee Democrats — Edward Kennedy (Mass.), Charles Schumer (N.Y.) and Dick Durbin (Ill.) — voted against him.
<>
John Edwards (D-N.C.) voted for him.
http://thehill.com/byron-york/roberts-opposition-as-a-bloc-would-hurt-dems-credibility-2005-09-15.html

[draft_mario_cuomo]

11. You missed post #3. They both voted the same way Orrin Hatch and Kerry did in 99.999% of these cases

:)

Can I have what you are smoking if you think Obama would have been the only senator to vote against Roberts in 2003? :crazy:

[FrenchieCat]

39. Hatch and Kerry aren't running, and Obama didn't vote for Roberts....

while Edwards did....a few times at that.

Your MO appears to be to attack a candidate's strength if it also happens to be a weakness of the candidate that you support. e.g., Edwards voted for Roberts, and Obama didn't.

You then attempt to justify Edwards' votes by playing the old "turn the table"....and implying that Obama voted to confirm some on a list that you then provide, although the list doesn't indicate which of those confirmed Obama suppositively voted for.

Of course, to the "Sane" here at DU, your approach still doesn't erase or answer Edwards' actual vote "FOR" someone like Roberts, but rather shifts the argument in an attempt to force Obama supporters in defending votes that hasn't been evidenced that Obama ever made.

At the end of the day, all that you have actually demonstrated is that lists of confirmations (Obama vs. Edwards) possibly being equal still leaves Edwards at a deficit.......as it is he who voted for Roberts, not OBama.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

51. No one cares about who voted for Roberts for a lower court

What a warped view of what a candidate's weaknesses are. No one cares about that. If they did Obama surely would have made an issue of it since Clinton, Biden, Dodd, and Edwards supported him along with every other senator in 2003. Biden and Dodd almost certainly also voted for Alito in 1990 in another unanimous vote. Of course, that would be profoundly idiotic. All they would have to do is list all the right-wingers Obama has voted for to put on lower courts, cite 200+ years of senatoe history, and Obama would look like a fool.

[AtomicKitten]

55. Oh, dear. You don't want to talk about that, huh?

You don't run the game here, DMC. You don't decide what counts and what doesn't. You set up a false analysis, it will be scrutinized. As usual, your entire point collapses because it was built on a false premise.

[karynnj]

58. There was no real vote - it was a voice vote

done when both sides agree that it is certain to pass. Edwards voted for him on committee when some of the liberals didn't.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

62. That is spin. 6 out of 8 Democrats voted for him the second time

Feingold and Leahy, apparently after doing some research into him, switched from abstaining to voting for Roberts. The notion that it was a liberal vs. centrist vote is a myth.

Judiciary Committee Vote on May 8, 2003:
Democrats Voting For Roberts:
Leahy
Biden
Kohl
Feinstein
Feingold
Edwards

Democrats Voting Against Roberts:
Kennedy
Durbin

Democrats Not Voting:
Schumer

Republicans Voting for Roberts:
Hatch
Grassley
Specter
Kyl
DeWine
Sessions
Graham
Craig
Chambliss
Cornyn

[karynnj]

64. My points were that there was no roll call vote and SOME of the liberals

voted against him. Not Spin, just fact.

[karynnj]

47. Kerry is not on the Judiciary Committee

In committee Hatch and Edwards did vote for, while Kennedy and Durbin voted against. If Obama were in the Senate and if he were on the judiciary committee, he would not have been alone. (The issue was likely no paper trail and refusal to give the committee opinions he wrote.)

[draft_mario_cuomo]

50. Kerry was in the senate and 0 senators voted against him on the senate floor

You are revising history. Roberts was not controversial in 2003 when being appointed to a lower court. Why do you think Feingold and Leahy voted for him? Only 2 people on that committee and 0 on the senate floor opposed Roberts then.

Obama's record is consistent. It is just like the other 99 senators on confirmed lower court judges. The notion that he would be 1 of 100 senators to oppose Roberts is absurd, especially when he was going to vote for him for the Supreme Court[/b[ in 2005 until he was alerted as to the political ramifications for doing so in a future presidential campaign.

[karynnj]

57. It was a VOICE VOTE

This means that both sides agreed he easilly had the numbers - so Kennedy, Durbin and others did not necessarilly change their minds. Who knows how Kerry would have voted, it is unlikely that he spoke given it was a voice vote and he is not on that committee.

Nomination: PN13-108
Date Received: January 07, 2003 (108th Congress)
Nominee: John G. Roberts, Jr., of Maryland, to be United States Circuit Judge for the District of Columbia Circuit, vice James L. Buckley, retired.
Referred to: Senate Judiciary
Reported by: Senate Judiciary
Reported by: Senate Judiciary


Legislative Actions
Floor Action: January 07, 2003 - Received in the Senate and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Committee Action: January 29, 2003 - Committee on the Judiciary. Hearings held. Hearings printed: S.Hrg. 108-135, pt.1.
Committee Action: February 27, 2003 - Committee on the Judiciary. Ordered to be reported favorably.
Floor Action: February 27, 2003 - Reported by Senator Hatch, Committee on the Judiciary, without printed report.
Floor Action: February 27, 2003 - Placed on Senate Executive Calendar. Calendar No. 35.
Floor Action: April 30, 2003 - Recommitted to Senate Committee on the Judiciary. by unanimous consent agreement of April 30, 2003.
Committee Action: April 30, 2003 - Committee on the Judiciary. Hearings held. Hearings printed: S.Hrg. 108-135, pt.3.
Committee Action: May 08, 2003 - Committee on the Judiciary. Ordered to be reported favorably.
Floor Action: May 08, 2003 - Reported by Senator Hatch, Committee on the Judiciary, without printed report.
Floor Action: May 08, 2003 - Placed on Senate Executive Calendar. Calendar No. 170.
Floor Action: May 08, 2003 - Confirmed by the Senate by Voice Vote.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

60. Why didn't they block that vote?

You know the answer. Roberts in 2003 was no big deal. He was a run-of-the-mill conservative appointee then. There was nothing especially bad in his record like there was with Prisicalla Owen, Janice Brown, and Pickering.

[karynnj]

66. Because they didn't have the votes and he was not the worst of the worst

My point is that you are playing games here. You tried to make an issue out of the fact that Obama could have taken Feingold's path to confirming Roberts. The fact is he didn't. You then got called because Edwards did vote for him in committee twice.

You then decided to bring all the Senators into - saying that Kerry and Hatch vote the same way almost always on these appointmants - both Hatch and Kerry would likely be appalled with that claim and dispute it. Now, you are saying he wasn't particularly bad. The problem is you are caught in a web trying to say Obama did something wrong and Edwards didn't.

[karynnj]

54. He could not possibly have voted 99.999% of the time with Kerry and Hatch

There are names on this list - Patricia Owens, for example, who Kerry voted against. Hatch did not. )This list is small enough pointing to one does it.) As Kerry and Hatch did not vote the same 99.999% of the time, you are just wrong.

Patricia Owens - link to Senate vote (where over 40 Democrats voted against her and Hatch for her.

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=109&session=1&vote=00128
For good measure, here's another - Griffin - again Kerry no, Hatch yes
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=109&session=1&vote=00136

This is one of the stupidest fights I have seen. It is not true that Senators vote for all appointees to the banch - it is true they are fussier as the rank increases.

Edited to fix link - (Obama voted with Durbin, so there this may not have been a completely bad choice.) As to a specific % not being literal - you obviously did not even try to look at that. In about a minute, I found 2. I do not intend to look for others - I've watched votes - they happen and they are never 100 - 0 - they would do a voice vote in that case.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

56. 99.99999% was not literal

Your first link did not work. As to the second the vote was 73-24. Guess who voted for Griffin?

YEAs ---73
Alexander (R-TN)
Allard (R-CO)
Allen (R-VA)
Baucus (D-MT)
Bennett (R-UT)
Biden (D-DE)
Bingaman (D-NM)
Bond (R-MO)
Brownback (R-KS)
Bunning (R-KY)
Burns (R-MT)
Burr (R-NC)
Carper (D-DE)
Chafee (R-RI)
Chambliss (R-GA)
Coburn (R-OK)
Cochran (R-MS)
Coleman (R-MN)
Collins (R-ME)
Conrad (D-ND)
Cornyn (R-TX)
Craig (R-ID)
Crapo (R-ID)
DeMint (R-SC)
DeWine (R-OH)
Dodd (D-CT)
Dole (R-NC)
Domenici (R-NM)
Dorgan (D-ND)
Durbin (D-IL)
Ensign (R-NV)
Enzi (R-WY)
Feinstein (D-CA)
Frist (R-TN)
Graham (R-SC)
Grassley (R-IA)
Gregg (R-NH)
Hagel (R-NE)
Hatch (R-UT)
Hutchison (R-TX)
Inhofe (R-OK)
Inouye (D-HI)
Isakson (R-GA)
Kohl (D-WI)
Kyl (R-AZ)
Levin (D-MI)
Lieberman (D-CT)
Lincoln (D-AR)
Lott (R-MS)
Lugar (R-IN)
Martinez (R-FL)
McCain (R-AZ)
McConnell (R-KY)
Murkowski (R-AK)
Nelson (D-FL)
Nelson (D-NE)
Obama (D-IL)
Pryor (D-AR)
Reid (D-NV)
Roberts (R-KS)
Schumer (D-NY)
Sessions (R-AL)
Shelby (R-AL)
Smith (R-OR)
Snowe (R-ME)
Stevens (R-AK)
Sununu (R-NH)
Talent (R-MO)
Thomas (R-WY)
Thune (R-SD)
Vitter (R-LA)
Voinovich (R-OH)
Warner (R-VA)

NAYs ---24

Akaka (D-HI)
Bayh (D-IN)
Boxer (D-CA)
Byrd (D-WV)
Cantwell (D-WA)
Clinton (D-NY)
Corzine (D-NJ)
Dayton (D-MN)
Feingold (D-WI)
Harkin (D-IA)
Johnson (D-SD)
Kennedy (D-MA)
Kerry (D-MA)
Landrieu (D-LA)
Lautenberg (D-NJ)
Leahy (D-VT)
Mikulski (D-MD)
Murray (D-WA)
Reed (D-RI)
Rockefeller (D-WV)
Salazar (D-CO)
Sarbanes (D-MD)
Stabenow (D-MI)
Wyden (D-OR)

Not Voting - 3
Jeffords (I-VT)
Santorum (R-PA)
Specter (R-PA)

[AtomicKitten]

13. Actually we've already seen the work of Hill and Edwards --

voting 'yes' on the IWR. They proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that their judgment is suspect.

Obama on the other hand has been right all along.

So, on one hand we have two candidates that proved they have poor judgment balanced against a candidate who has had it right all along ... hmmmm, let's see, carry the 3, nope, it's not blind faith at all. It's MY good judgment that chooses the candidate that hasn't screwed the pooch.

[Clintonista2]

14. Every vote that Obama cast to fund the war was a vote cast to support the war

You're delusional if you deny this fact.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

15. lol I have that person on ignore but it is not shocking to see the IWR card come into this thread

Notice how every senate vote that Obama fans deem important happens to be one that Obama never had to cast a vote on?

[Clintonista2]

16. Yep, it all comes back to the IWR. That's why Obama supporters hate kucinich

The fact that Kucinich really did oppose the war, not only through his words, but also through his actions, really steals Obama's thunder.

[AtomicKitten]

18. I really like Kucinich -- He just can't get beyond 5%.

so your analysis is wrong

[rufus dog]

25. WRONG!

I don't hate Dennis, I don't think he electable but I actually like him.

[FrenchieCat]

40. Edwards, Obama and Kucinich are not interchangeable.....

And so Edwards' vote on the IWR was Edwards' vote on the IWR.....

Kucinich being right doesn't liberate Edwards from his vote.

Obama publicly being against the IWR at the time doesn't hurt him, and it doesn't hurt Kucinich; it hurts John Edwards and to a lesser degree,(because she didn't co-sponsor the IWR) Hillary.

That's actually how it really works. :eyes:

[draft_mario_cuomo]

48. Lirwin is right. Kucinich is the only real anti-war candidate

Obama and Edwards were interchangeable from 2005-2006; Obama and Clinton have been interchangeable from 2005 to the present day as both have identical voting records and the same plan to leave an unspecified number of troops in Iraq for an unspecified length of time. Kucinich has voted against funding (a de facto vote to continue the war) 100% of the time and has called for an immediate withdrawal since 2003. He did not jump on that bandwagon when running for president in 2007. The facts reflect all this. What you posted is mere opinion and not reflected in the opinions of people outside of the IWR temple. If you were correct Obama, not IWR voter Clinton, would be well ahead in the race and Obama would not be down to the margin of error with Edwards for 2nd.

[AtomicKitten]

20. and many have you on ignore, DMC

Me, I can't wait to see what SLIME thing you post next.

[jefferson_dem]

28. Why do you have that person on ignore?

I'm curious.

[AtomicKitten]

32. It's because I called him on his using Drudge as a source --

in his quest to slam Obama.

It isn't good enough that Obama is right, DMC feels it's a viable argument to impugn his reasoning for being right.

[AtomicKitten]

17. He didn't vote to start the war -- it's delusional to deny that.

[renie408]

19. I think the point is that he didn't have the opportunity one way or the other. n/t

[AtomicKitten]

21. I think the point is that he was staunchly against the war --

as portrayed in a fiery speech in 2002 BEFORE the idiots in Congress abdicated their war-declaring powers to an Junior.

I LUV how some like to down-play the significance of that vote. It tells me everything I need to know about Hillary and Edwards, and of those who try to marginalize its impact.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

22. Obama himself is on record saying he doesn't know how he would have voted on the IWR...

...if he actually had to cast a vote. Of course, he changed his tune once he began running for president...

"I'm not privy to Senate intelligence reports," Mr. Obama said. "What would
I have done? I don't know. What I know is that from my vantage point the
case was not made."

[AtomicKitten]

23. But Hillary and Edwards ACTUALLY voted "yes" on the IWR.

No matter how you try to spin that, that is the truth and the bottom line.

[FrenchieCat]

41. Could I get that link in where you are quoting Sen. Obama, please?

Because it doesn't read like what Obama stated on the Charlie Rose show back in October of 2002...where he explicitly said that he would not vote for the IWR blank check.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

44. He changed his tune in 2004 and it was discussed here several times

Google is your friend. I am surprised someone who is so big on the IWR is unaware of that...

[AtomicKitten]

46. Your allegation does not make it so.

No links ... check
Partial quotes ... check
Hard-on for hurting Obama ... check
Not afraid to make a fool of yourself ... check

There's plenty of evidence to the contrary. But, knock yourself out. It's kinda full watching you spin your wheels.

[FrenchieCat]

61. Google is my friend, but you are the Obama attack dog.......

so where is your back up to make your information true, and you a credible source? :shrug:

[draft_mario_cuomo]

63. I am not here to do your homework on your candidate and your precious IWR issue nt

[FrenchieCat]

65. Well Don't provide quoted remarks without source........

cause that doesn't help the case that you are making in reference to Obama and the IWR.

I've done my homework.......but obviously, Google ate yours.

[rufus dog]

24. So you attack Obama yet support Edwards?

Doesn't seem to pass the smell test!

[jefferson_dem]

27. Edwards voted for Roberts twice in committee and on the floor. Obama opposed him in his only vote.

I guess that would amount to a criticm of Obama... at freeperland... :shrug:

[draft_mario_cuomo]

31. BO fans made the vote the issue. The real story was BO stuck his finger in the wind before voting...

...for a Supreme Court nominee. So much for his much hyped "judgment"... He needed to see which way the political winds were blowing before casting a vote.

[AtomicKitten]

34. no the real story is your Rovian tactics to slime Obama

shame on you

[jefferson_dem]

35. Edwards voted for Roberts 3x. Obama voted against him in his only opportunity.

We know who turned out to be right. Are you done yet?

[draft_mario_cuomo]

36. And that has what to do with Obama voting for a Supreme Court nominee based on political calculation

How many of the following right-wingers did Obama vote against? You must know the answer which is why you are dodging it...You cannot be serious if you think Obama would have been 1 of 100 senators to opposed Roberts in 2003. Why? What made Roberts stick out in 2003? He did not even have a terrible record in 2005 compared to most right-wing nominees. Obama could not even vote against Gonzo and you think he would have been 1 of 100 to vote for a guy even Feingold voted for.

When was Roberts nominated for the Supreme Court? Can you show us Edwards voting record on Supreme Court nominees?

Name Date of Hearing Date Confirmed

Barrett, Michael Ryan 3/29/06 5/1/06
Batten, Sr., Timothy C. 2/7/06 3/6/06
Besosa, Francisco Augusto 8/1/06 9/25/06
Bianco, Joseph Frank 11/1/05 12/21/05
Brown, Janice R. 10/23/03 6/8/05
Bumb, Renee Marie 4/25/06 6/6/06
Burgess, Timothy 11/1/05 12/21/05
Chagares, Michael 3/14/06 4/4/06
Cogan, Brian 3/29/06 5/4/06
Conrad, Robert 3/3/05 4/28/05
Cox, Sean F. 5/2/06 6/8/06
Crotty, Paul A. 11/16/04 4/11/05
Delgado-Colon, Aida M. 2/7/06 3/6/06
Dever, James 3/3/05 4/28/05
DuBose, Kristi 11/15/05 12/21/05
Gelpi, Gustavo A. 6/15/06 7/20/06
Golden, Thomas 3/29/06 5/4/06
Gordon, Leo Maury 2/7//06 3/13/06
Gorsuch, Neil M. 6/21//06 7/20/06
Griffin, Richard A. 6/16/04 6/9/05
Griffith, Thomas B. 3/8/05 6/14/05
Guilford, Andrew J. 5/24/06 6/22/06
Hillman, Noel Lawrence 4/25/06 6/8/06
Holmes, Jerome A. 6/15/06 7/25/06
Ikuta, Sandra Segal 5/2/06 6/19/06
Johnston, Thomas E. 2/7/06 3/6/06
Jordan III, Daniel Porter 6/15/06 7/20/06
Jordan, Kent A 9/6/06 12/8/06
Kavanaugh, Brett 5/9/06 5/26/06
Kendall, Virginia Mary 11/15/05 12/21/05
Larson, Stephen G. 2/15/06 3/16/06
Ludington, Thomas L 5/2/06 6/8/06
Mattice, Jr., Harry Sandlin 9/29/05 10/24/05
McKeague, David W. 6/16/04 6/9/05
Neilson, Susan Bieke 9/8/04 10/27/05
Miller, Gray 3/14/06 4/25/06
Moore, Kimberly 6/28/06 9/5/06
Owen, Priscilla Richman 3/13/03 5/25/05
Pryor, Jr., William H. 6/11/03 6/9/05
Sandoval, Brian Edward 9/29/05 10/24/05
Schiltz, Patrick Joseph 3/1/06 4/26/06
Seabright, J. Michael 11/16/04 4/27/05
Shepherd, Bobby E. 6/28/06 7/20/06
Sheridan, Peter G. 4/25/06 6/8/06
Smoak, John Richard 9/29/05 10/27/05
Smith, Milan 4/25/06 5/16/06
*Sweeney, Margaret Mary 9/29/05 10/21/05
**Tydingco-Gatewood, Frances 7/11/06 8/3/06
VanTatenhove, Gregory F. 11/1/05 12/21/05
Vitaliano, Eric Nicholas 11/1/05 12/21/05
Watkins, W. Keith 11/15/05 12/21/05
*Wheeler, Thomas Craig 9/29/05 10/21/05
Whitney, Frank DeArmon 5/24/06 6/22/06
Wigenton, Susan Davis 4/25/06 5/26/06
Zouhary, Jack 2/15/06 3/16/06

[AtomicKitten]

42. who cares WHY he voted against Roberts --- HE VOTED AGAINST HIM!!!

Perhaps you should explore why Edwards voted FOR Roberts in 2003.

No? Didn't think so.

[jefferson_dem]

26. This is the most asinine argument i've seen here in a long time.

You criticize Obama for voting NO on Roberts. Turns out, Edwards voted YES on him in Committee TWICE. The votes were not unanimous. Kennedy, Schumer, Durbin, Leahy and Feingold all had the sense to not vote YES like Edwards did.

http://www.cfif.org/htdocs/legislative_issues/federal_issues/hot_issues_in_congress/supreme_court_watch/judiciary-committee-vote.htm

Left looking like a fool in that thread, you launch a new one with a crazy new line of (il)logic. I guess your defense of Edwards voting for Roberts is that it's acceptable to rubber stamp nominees for lower courts. Whatever.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

29. Are you opposed to voting for right-wing judicial nominees for lower courts?

Or is it kosher when Obama (like everyone else) routinely does say? You can't have it both ways.

Feingold and Leahy voted for Roberts the second time in committee while Schumer did not vast. Kennedy, Schumer, and Durbin did not vote against him on the senate floor. In fact, not a single senator did. This is par for the course for judicial appointments to lower courts, as the OP points out. You just can't defend Obama's record because it would expose the absurdity of the very argument you made regarding Edwards voting for a then obscure lower court nominee.

Judiciary Committee Vote on May 8, 2003:
Democrats Voting For Roberts:
Leahy
Biden
Kohl
Feinstein
Feingold
Edwards

Democrats Voting Against Roberts:
Kennedy
Durbin

Democrats Not Voting:
Schumer

Republicans Voting for Roberts:
Hatch
Grassley
Specter
Kyl
DeWine
Sessions
Graham
Craig
Chambliss
Cornyn

[jefferson_dem]

30. What about the committee votes? Edwards rubber stamped Roberts like a champ...

Let me put it this way, if Obama was serving on the Jud Comm and he voted as Edwards did...on Roberts. I would not be happy. Are you?

[draft_mario_cuomo]

33. So you have no problem with rubber stamping lower court nominees if Obama does it?

Are you going to criticize Obama for the dozens of right-wingers he has (correctly. Hey, it has worked for 200+ years and someday there will be a Democrat in the White House...)?

Edwards, Feingold, Leahy and others cast the incorrect vote in the committee, cast the correct vote on the senate floor. Suppose Roberts was blocked. Guess what? Another right-winger would have been nominated. :crazy: That is why it is stupid to oppose a lower court nominee based on ideology and why Barack Obama and 99 other senators do not do it. The only ones who should be opposed are the egregious ones like Pickering and Owen. Roberts, who had little record until he got onto the SCOTUS, is not in the same league as them, although it is fashionable to conflate him with the others. Roberts is probably the best nominee we could ever get from Bush.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

37. Obama: 205 of 214 * lower court nominees approved

Notice he is not reeling off the list of right-wingers he voted against it? Why? That would be a very short list (like it would be for the other 99 senators). :crazy:

==The fact is that both parties have worked together to confirm 95% of this President's judicial nominees. The Senate has accepted 205 of his 214 selections. In fact, we just confirmed another one judge this week by a vote of 95-0. Overall, this is a better record than any President's had in the last 25 years. For a President who received 51% of the vote and a Senate chamber made up of 55% of the President's party, I'd say that confirming 95% of your judicial nominations is a record I'd be pretty happy with.==

http://obama.senate.gov/speech/050413-statement_of_senator_barack_ob/index.php

[AtomicKitten]

38. Junior's recess appointments make this argument moot.

Back to Drudge for you for some more material.

[rufus dog]

45. At least he is not using his 99.9999% rheatoric

Just pure BS pushed by the OP, critical thinking and logic are thrown out in an effort to smear. I would bet $100 that he is a Republican operative.

[AtomicKitten]

49. there is much speculation behind the scenes --

99.99999% chance you are right

[draft_mario_cuomo]

52. So 0 Obama fans know the answer to the OP? nt

[draft_mario_cuomo]

59. Obama voted for egregious Priscilla Owen. Even Gonzo criticized her on the TX court!

Owen was so bad she was blocked from getting a vote by Democrats for years. She finally got a vote in 2005.

NYT editorial on her: Priscilla Owen, President Bush's latest nominee to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, has been at times so eager to issue conservative rulings in cases before her on the Texas Supreme Court that she has ignored statutory language and substituted her own views. This criticism comes not from the "special interest groups" she has charged with misstating her record, but from Alberto Gonzales, President Bush's own White House counsel. Mr. Gonzales, who served with Justice Owen on the Texas high court, once lambasted her dissent in an abortion case for engaging in "unconscionable . . . judicial activism." Mr. Gonzales says today that he nonetheless supports the elevation of Justice Owen. We do not.

In choosing a nominee for the Fifth Circuit — the powerful federal appeals court for Texas, Mississippi and Louisiana — President Bush has looked to the extreme right wing of the legal profession. Even on Texas' conservative Supreme Court, Justice Owen has distinguished herself as one of the most conservative members. A former lawyer for the oil and gas industry, she reflexively favors manufacturers over consumers, employers over workers and insurers over sick people. In abortion cases Justice Owen has been resourceful about finding reasons that, despite United States Supreme Court holdings and Texas case law, women should be denied the right to choose.

Justice Owen's views are so far from the mainstream that, on those grounds alone, the Senate should be reluctant to confirm her. But what is particularly disturbing about her approach to judging is, as Mr. Gonzales has identified, her willingness to ignore the text and intent of laws that stand in her way. In an important age discrimination case, Justice Owen dissented to argue that the plaintiff should have to meet a higher standard than Texas law requires.

Justice Owen has also shown a disturbing lack of sensitivity to judicial ethics. She has raised large amounts of campaign contributions from corporations and law firms, and then declined to recuse herself when those contributors have had cases before her. And as a judicial candidate, she publicly endorsed a pro-business political action committee that was raising money to influence the rulings of the Texas Supreme Court.

After the Senate Judiciary Committee rejected Judge Charles Pickering, another far-right choice, for a seat on the Fifth Circuit earlier this year, the Bush administration declared that it would not be intimidated into choosing more centrist nominees. Sadly, the administration has lived up to its threat. In this dispute the Senate is right: the administration should stop trying to use the judiciary to advance a political agenda that is out of step with the views of most Americans.

Justice Owen is a choice that makes sense for Justice Department ideologues who want to turn the courts into a champion of big business, insurance companies and the religious right. But the American people deserve better. Justice Owen's nomination should be rejected.

http://www.nytimes.com/2002/09/04/opinion/04WED1.html?ex=1188360000&en=2f3a281a36ee5661&ei=5070

Grouped By Vote Position
YEAs ---81
Akaka (D-HI)
Alexander (R-TN)
Allard (R-CO)
Allen (R-VA)
Baucus (D-MT)
Bayh (D-IN)
Bennett (R-UT)
Bingaman (D-NM)
Bond (R-MO)
Brownback (R-KS)
Bunning (R-KY)
Burns (R-MT)
Burr (R-NC)
Byrd (D-WV)
Carper (D-DE)
Chafee (R-RI)
Chambliss (R-GA)
Clinton (D-NY)
Coburn (R-OK)
Cochran (R-MS)
Coleman (R-MN)
Collins (R-ME)
Conrad (D-ND)
Cornyn (R-TX)
Craig (R-ID)
Crapo (R-ID)
DeMint (R-SC)
DeWine (R-OH)
Dole (R-NC)
Domenici (R-NM)
Durbin (D-IL)
Ensign (R-NV)
Enzi (R-WY)
Feinstein (D-CA)
Frist (R-TN)
Graham (R-SC)
Grassley (R-IA)
Gregg (R-NH)
Hagel (R-NE)
Harkin (D-IA)
Hatch (R-UT)
Hutchison (R-TX)
Inhofe (R-OK)
Isakson (R-GA)
Johnson (D-SD)
Kohl (D-WI)
Kyl (R-AZ)
Landrieu (D-LA)
Leahy (D-VT)
Lieberman (D-CT)
Lott (R-MS)
Lugar (R-IN)
Martinez (R-FL)
McCain (R-AZ)
McConnell (R-KY)
Mikulski (D-MD)
Murkowski (R-AK)
Nelson (D-FL)
Nelson (D-NE)
Obama (D-IL)
Pryor (D-AR)
Reid (D-NV)
Roberts (R-KS)
Rockefeller (D-WV)
Salazar (D-CO)
Santorum (R-PA)
Schumer (D-NY)
Sessions (R-AL)
Shelby (R-AL)
Smith (R-OR)
Snowe (R-ME)
Specter (R-PA)
Stevens (R-AK)
Sununu (R-NH)
Talent (R-MO)
Thomas (R-WY)
Thune (R-SD)
Vitter (R-LA)
Voinovich (R-OH)
Warner (R-VA)
Wyden (D-OR)

NAYs ---18
Biden (D-DE)
Boxer (D-CA)
Cantwell (D-WA)
Corzine (D-NJ)
Dayton (D-MN)
Dodd (D-CT)
Dorgan (D-ND)
Feingold (D-WI)
Jeffords (I-VT)
Kennedy (D-MA)
Kerry (D-MA)
Lautenberg (D-NJ)
Levin (D-MI)
Lincoln (D-AR)
Murray (D-WA)
Reed (D-RI)
Sarbanes (D-MD)
Stabenow (D-MI)

Not Voting - 1
Inouye (D-HI)

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=109&session=1&vote=00127