3? 5?

I thought there were 9 contested judges in this Senate showdown???

In short, did we make out OK???

C'mon hivemind... think for me dammit!

Ten were being held back.  This deal will allow all but the two most conservative to get an up or down vote.

I answered my own question!

www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1409163/posts

Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R.-Tenn.) made the following statement Monday on the Senate floor. Mr. President. I have had the opportunity to review the agreement signed by the Senator from Virginia, the Senator from Arizona, the Senator from Nebraska, and eleven other Senators--an agreement that I’ve reviewed but to which I am not a party. Let me start by reminding the Senate of my principle. A simple principle that I’ve come to this floor day after day stating. It’s really this, that I fundamentally believe that it is our constitutional responsibility to give judicial nominees the respect and the courtesy of an up or down vote on the floor of the United States Senate. Investigate them. And question them. And scrutinize them. And debate them. In the best spirit of this body. But then, vote. Up or down. Yes, or no. Confirm or reject. But each deserves a vote. Unlike bills, nominees cannot be amended. They cannot be split apart. They cannot be horsetraded or logrolled. Our Constitution does not allow for any of that. It simply requires up or down votes on judicial nominees. So, in that regard, this agreement announced tonight falls short of that principle. It falls short. It has some good news, and has some disappointing news, and will require careful monitoring. Let me start with the good news. I am very pleased that each and every one of the judges identified in this announcement will receive the opportunity of that fair, up or down, vote. Priscilla Owen: after four years, two weeks, and one day, a fair, up or down, vote. William Pryor: after two years and 1 month, he will have a fair, up or down, vote. Janice Rogers Brown: after 22 months, a fair, up or down, vote. Three nominees will get up or down votes with certainty now because of this agreement. Whereas a couple of hours ago, maybe none would get up or down votes. And that would have been wrong. And, with the confirmation of Tom Griffith to the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, which we’ve been assured of, though it’s not part of this particular agreement, there will be four who will receive up or down votes. And based on past comments, on this floor, although not in the agreement, I expect that David McKeague, after three years and six months, will get a fair up or down vote. I expect that Susan Neilson, after three years and six months, will get a fair, up or down, vote. I expect that Richard Griffin, after two years and 11 months, will get a fair, up or down, vote. Now, the bad news. It is a shame that well-qualified nominees identified by those 12 members are threatened still with not having the opportunity to have the merits of their nominations debated on the floor. Henry Saad waited for three years for the same courtesy. He deserves a vote. William Myers has waited for two years and one week for a fair, up or down vote. He deserves a vote. If Owen, Pryor, and Brown can receive the courtesy and respect of a fair up or down vote, so can Myers and Saad. So I will continue to work with everything in my power to see that these judicial nominees also receive that fair, up or down vote that they deserve. But it is not in this agreement. But in this agreement is other good news. It is significant that the signers give up using the filibuster as it was deployed in the last Congress, in the last two years. The filibuster was abused in the last Congress. Ten nominees were blocked on 18 different filibusters occasions, 18 different filibusters in the last two years alone. With a leadership led minority party obstruction threatening filibusters on six others. That was wrong. It was not in keeping with our precedents over the past 214 years. It made light of our responsibilities as U.S. Senators under the Constitution. It was a miserable chapter in the history of the Senate and I believe brought us to a new low. Fortunately, tonight, it is possible that this unfortunate chapter in history can close because this arrangement makes it much less likely?"indeed, nearly impossible?"for such mindless filibusters to erupt on this floor over the next 18 months. And for that I am thankful. Circuit Court and Supreme Court nominees face a return to normalcy here in the Senate, where nominees are considered on their merits. Their records are carefully examined. They offer testimony, and are questioned by the Senate Judiciary Committee. The Committee acts. And then the Senate discharges its constitutional duty to vote, up or down, on a nominee. So given this disarmament on the filibuster and the assurance of fair up or down votes on nominees, there is no need at present for the constitutional option. But with this agreement, all options remain on the table ?" including the constitutional option. If it had been necessary to deploy the constitutional option, it would have been successful, and the Senate would have by rule returned to the precedent of the past 214 years. Instead, tonight, members have agreed that this precedent of up or down votes should be a norm of behavior as the result of mutual trust and goodwill in that agreement. I of course will monitor this agreement carefully as we move ahead to fill the pending 46 vacancies on the Federal bench today, and other vacancies that may yet arise during this Congress. I have made it clear from the outset that I haven’t wanted to use the constitutional option, I do not want to use the constitutional option, but bad faith and return to bad behavior during my tenure as Majority Leader will bring the Senate back to the point where all 100 members will be asked to decide whether judicial nominees deserve a fair up or down vote. And I will not hesitate to call all members to their duty if necessary. But for now, as reflected in this agreement, I look forward to swift action on the identified nominations. Now the full impact of this agreement will await its implementation. But I do believe that the good faith and good ought to guarantee a return to good behavior on the Senate floor. And that when the gavel falls on the 109th Congress, the precedent of the last 214 years will once again govern: fair, up or down votes on the floor of the United States Senate. Now this will be spun as a victory, I would assume, for everyone. Some will say this is a victory for our leadership. Some for the group of fourteen. I see it as a victory for the Senate, I honestly believe it is a victory for the Senate. Where members have put aside a party demand to block action on judicial nominees. They rose to principle. And then acted accordingly. I am also gratified with how clearly the Democratic Leader has repeated, over and over again during this debate, how much he looks forward in working with us and I with him as we move forward on the agenda of the 109th Congress. Our relationship has been forged in part by circumstance, but leavened by friendship. I look forward to working with him as we move the nation’s agenda forward together. We have much to do, from addressing vital issues of national defense and homeland security, to reinforcing our energy independence and our role as a reliable and strong trading partner, to an orderly consideration of all the bills before us about funding and to put the deficit on the decline. I look forward to working with the Democratic leader on these and many other issues of national importance. Mr. President, a lot has been about the uniqueness of this body and indeed our Senate is unique, and we all as individuals and collectively as a body have a role to play in ensuring its cherished nature remains intact. And indeed, as demonstrated by tonight’s agreement and by the ultimate implementation of that agreement, we have done just that. It has withstood mighty tests that have torn other governments apart. The genius is in its quiet voice, not the mighty thunder; the harmony of equality brings all to its workings with an equal stake at determining its future. In all that the Senate has done in the last two years, I as leader, have attempted to discharge my task as steward of the institution consistent with my responsibilities not just as the Majority Leader, not just as Republican Leader, but also as the Senator from Tennessee. In closing tonight Mr. President, with this agreement, the Senate begins the hard work of steering back to its better days, leaving behind some of its worst. While I would have liked my principle to have been fully validated, for this Congress, now, we have begun our labors for fairness and up or down votes on judicial nominees with a positive course. And as all involved keep their word, it should be much smoother sailing. I yield the floor.

It looks to me like we got 7 of 9 judges. Not perfect by a long shot, but not all that bad either.

3 out of 7.

We punked out....as usual.

ETA: I guess the report I read was wrong; it is 7.  It still sucks.

Quoted: 3 out of 7. We punked out....as usual.

We voted in a Republican President (well, he *ran* as a Republican but I'm having my doubts watching him give away the store on Mexico ) by a SOLID margin and have a Republican legislative branch as well and they STILL fuck around and act like they have to "build consensus" about EVERY FUCKING THING THAT THEY DO!

What the FUCK do we have to do, let this country become a fucking dictatorship before the PARTY ELECTED TO POWER can actually DO SOMETHING.

Vote Republican:  End up where the Democrats are taking us, we'll just get you there a bit slower.  

I'm almost ready to start the Revolution by voting for every crackpot, freedom stealing, radical fucktard, moonbat Democrat that I can find.  It's becoming PAINFULLY obvious that the Republicans don't have the balls to push back and that we're going to end up in shambles.  Fine.  Let's just fucking get it over with.  Give the Democrats the keys, let them get drunk with power and drive us into the river.

The frog isn't going to jump out of the pot with the Republicans in charge (yeah, right... "in charge" ) but maybe if the Democrats turn it up to "11" enough sheeple will get burned.

Quoted: Quoted: 3 out of 7. We punked out....as usual. We voted in a Republican President (well, he *ran* as a Republican but I'm having my doubts watching him give away the store on Mexico ) by a SOLID margin and have a Republican legislative branch as well and they STILL fuck around and act like they have to "build consensus" about EVERY FUCKING THING THAT THEY DO! What the FUCK do we have to do, let this country become a fucking dictatorship before the PARTY ELECTED TO POWER can actually DO SOMETHING. Vote Republican:  End up where the Democrats are taking us, we'll just get you there a bit slower.   I'm almost ready to start the Revolution by voting for every crackpot, freedom stealing, radical fucktard, moonbat Democrat that I can find.  It's becoming PAINFULLY obvious that the Republicans don't have the balls to push back and that we're going to end up in shambles.  Fine.  Let's just fucking get it over with.  Give the Democrats the keys, let them get drunk with power and drive us into the river. The frog isn't going to jump out of the pot with the Republicans in charge (yeah, right... "in charge" ) but maybe if the Democrats turn it up to "11" enough sheeple will get burned.

Airwolf, I hear where you are coming from, and generally agree with your frustration, but take a deep breath & look at what just transpired...

-Frist feels very strongly that 7 of the 9 "controversial" judges will get an up or down vote in the Senate. In other words, they will be CONFIRMED, without the bad press & likely political fallout that would have resulted if this fight had gone "nuclear".

- Bush now has carte blanche to nominate future judges who are just as conservative as these seven judges (which is pretty damn conservative). The Democrats don't have a leg to stand on if they try to pull their BS again... the seven Democrat Senators who signed off on this deal have essentially set & agreed to an acceptable level of conservatism in judicial nominees on behalf of their political party. What exactly will their argument be when Bush nominates future "Priscilla Owens'", William Pryors', and "Janice Rogers Browns'"???

The answer is they won't have any valid or logical reasoning behind why they can oppose future judges with similar backgrounds & rulings. They sold their entire argument against Bush's nominees (present & future) for just two judges!

Like I said...  Not perfect by a long shot, but not all that bad either.

Now come down off that ledge buddy!
 


       

Quoted: Now come down off that ledge buddy!

Nice to have some calmer heads around when you need them!

Sorry, the Republican Senate leadership just rolled over on us, just like they did when Clintoon came up for impeachment.

Same old spineless GOP, I'm afraid.

And don't call what was being threatened the "nuclear" option. It was the Constitutional option. Don't let the media define the debate by using their words.

To say that I'm disgusted is understatement of the century. No Republican gets my vote in the future unless he has a demonstratable record of sticking to the so-called principles Republicans stand for.
It would appear that my voting for a Republican in a national level election in the forseeable future is a very remote possibility.

fucking ball less republicans
they need to tell the dims that they lost
make the dims do a real filabuster, the kind where they have to talk non-stop or lose the floor
let the people see who the real obstructionists are
if the nominees are really that bad the dims should have no trouble finding 51 no votes

Remember, the Democrats set a bar to measure against. Those three that we got past we can now send to the Supreme Court if we damn well feel like it and they can't do a damn thing.

Two questions I need answered???  

Are any of these judges ultra 2nd freindly???


Will any be in a position to effect our 2nd rights positively????

I'm still lost here.

Quoted: Sorry, the Republican Senate leadership just rolled over on us, just like they did when Clintoon came up for impeachment. Same old spineless GOP, I'm afraid. And don't call what was being threatened the "nuclear" option. It was the Constitutional option. Don't let the media define the debate by using their words. To say that I'm disgusted is understatement of the century. No Republican gets my vote in the future unless he has a demonstratable record of sticking to the so-called principles Republicans stand for. It would appear that my voting for a Republican in a national level election in the forseeable future is a very remote possibility.

The Republican Senate leadership had no say so in the matter... thanks to McCain and other RINOs Frist did not have the votes... it is that simple. McCain saw to it Frist was cut off at the knees.

Frist was left with a choice nothing or something... blame the right people here and remember.

Quoted: fucking ball less republicans they need to tell the dims that they lost make the dims do a real filabuster, the kind where they have to talk non-stop or lose the floor let the people see who the real obstructionists are if the nominees are really that bad the dims should have no trouble finding 51 no votes

The problem is that the MSM would have gone into high gear to spin this story so that the Republicans are seen as the bad guys trying to undermine democracy & the Democrats are the good guys trying to preserve it.

Rightly or wrongly (and the Republicans were most assuredly RIGHT on this issue), the PR fallout for the GOP would have been FAR worse than for the Rats. That fact sucks, but perception is largely reality when you have the news media in your back pocket.

I'm certainly no Republican apologist, but in this case I think they played their hand wisely.

Quoted: Quoted: fucking ball less republicans they need to tell the dims that they lost make the dims do a real filabuster, the kind where they have to talk non-stop or lose the floor let the people see who the real obstructionists are if the nominees are really that bad the dims should have no trouble finding 51 no votes The problem is that the MSM would have gone into high gear to spin this story so that the Republicans are seen as the bad guys trying to undermine democracy & the Democrats are the good guys trying to preserve it. Rightly or wrongly (and the Republicans were most assuredly RIGHT on this issue), the PR fallout for the GOP would have been FAR worse than for the Rats. That fact sucks, but perception is largely reality when you have the news media in your back pocket. I'm certainly no Republican apologist, but in this case I think they played their hand wisely.

I just wanted to see John McCain on the outs.  This is a RINO I would love to see outed or replaced.

Quoted: Quoted: fucking ball less republicans they need to tell the dims that they lost make the dims do a real filabuster, the kind where they have to talk non-stop or lose the floor let the people see who the real obstructionists are if the nominees are really that bad the dims should have no trouble finding 51 no votes The problem is that the MSM would have gone into high gear to spin this story so that the Republicans are seen as the bad guys trying to undermine democracy & the Democrats are the good guys trying to preserve it. Rightly or wrongly (and the Republicans were most assuredly RIGHT on this issue), the PR fallout for the GOP would have been FAR worse than for the Rats. That fact sucks, but perception is largely reality when you have the news media in your back pocket. I'm certainly no Republican apologist, but in this case I think they played their hand wisely.

The Republicans control everything and have enough officials that they could pound the media for weeks on how they are trying to get work done but the Democrats are refusing to work.  The problem is we no longer have a strong leader and no one wants to put the effort in to fight.  If the Republicans would stand up, take control, and lead they would get a lot more respect.  What they compromised to do was keep the status quo.  How pathetic is it that the Republicans who have complete control argued for two months and then settled on keeping things the same?  That just shows how ineffective and weak their leadership is.

After Sept 11th Bush came out, told the world how it was going to be, and then stood up to lead the country there.  His actions were highly questionable but with the confidence he had and the manner in which led no one was able to put up a good defence against him.  During this time his approval ratings soared to the highest ratings ever!  People want a strong confident leader who gets things done, not a whiney weak compromising leader who can't do anything more than the status quo.

Frankly, I don't understand the outrage.

Quoted: The Republican Senate leadership had no say so in the matter... thanks to McCain and other RINOs Frist did not have the votes... it is that simple. McCain saw to it Frist was cut off at the knees.

Bingo. It is hard to blame the Republican
majority for this one. Seven "republican"
senators made the decision for the majority.

It makes Frist look bad since he was
not able to reign in the seven, but what
are you going to do with a bunch of
spineless RINOs.

Quoted: Frankly, I don't understand the outrage.

Nominees who clear the judiciary committee should receive a vote on the Senate Floor.  The voice of majority should not be silenced indefinately by the minority.  

Most of the outrage exists because leaving the filibuster for judicial nominees in place ensures that they will filibuster GWB's first SCOTUS nomination

Change the thread title to:



Republicans WIMPED OUT

Sanity check:

1. The senate democrats made a "deal" whereby they will actually "allow" a VOTE on judicial nominees submitted for confirmation by the President as is their CONSTITUTIONAL DUTY, while preserving the "tradition" of filibuster in the senate which, last I checked, was a heck of a lot younger than the Constitution.

What exactly do we win in that scenario? The dems finally agree to do their bloody job on SOME judges. Whoopee.

2. This "deal" would only allow a filibuster under "extreme" circumstances, with the definition of extreme being defined by the dems, meaning that they could whip out the filibuster again if they so chose to yet again withold a vote on the President's nominees.

How is that different than right now again?

3. The dems finally allow a vote on judges who have been waiting for a simple yes or no vote for YEARS. Break out the party favors! The dems finally agree to do their damn duty and allow a vote. But only in part, because they remain determined to keep SOME appointments in absolute limbo, not even allowing a vote.

The democrats will only allow a vote on judges they feel are "acceptable", somehow thinking that they have the right to forbid a vote if they might loose the vote, totally ignoring the fact that the people of the US have deliberately voted more of the other team in power than them by a wide enough margin to approve judges over their objections. If they can't win a vote, then there shall be no vote!

How exactly does that differ from Sadaam again?


So what exactly is this deal? I'll tell you what it is:



A giant turd sandwich.

Yet again the Republican "moderates" have listened to all the bloody media hype and have, as a sign of their true strength, pre-emptively caved in. When faced with news reports about how the sacred filibuster on judicial nominations was about to be done away with (it was never used much to begin with because previous congresses had sense enough to do their duty) and how that would create a bitterly divided senate. (As if the current senate arrangement has been peace and love? The dems wouldn't even allow votes on judges. That's about as bitterly partisan as you can get)

The weak-kneed moderate republicans, in a grand gesture of bipartisan sense, made an agreement with democrats that lets them do what they want any time they want while simply allowing votes on judges that should have been confirmed by now anyway, as the ABA can't even find anything wrong with them.

The sissy-pants moderate republicans have just handed the democrats control of the senate, demonstrating once and for all that the republican party lacks the testicular fortitude to govern and use the power the people gave them. Yet again the democrat-lite moderate republicans have sold out their president and their party purely so they can get good press coverage.

John McCain is doing his damndest to look like a bipartisan hero. The dems get to do what they wanted to do anyway (deny GWB ANYTHING they want ANY time they want) while only allowing judges that they had no real reason to object to in the first place. McCain got nothing from the dems except a dog and pony show for the media, who already loves him because he has an R by his name but consistently plays politics like there is a D beside his name. So this coming week we will hear the high praises of Senator McCain from the media, all of them speaking of what a hero he is, trying to make HIM the leader of the Republican senate rather than Frist.

McCain and the dems here have made a deliberate power play to control the senate. To the dems, the judge issue has NEVER been about judges, but has always been about controlling the senate despite the inconvenience of not having been given the right to do so by the American people. McCain, so eager to be President, has partnered with the dems to ensure that happens in the hopes that the noteriety he will win from them will boost his presidential hopes, not realizing that the minute he is running opposite a D (like Hillary) the dems will turn on him and savage him in a very public and nasty way. His beloved media will do the same.

McCain is allowing himself to be used as a tool to promote the dem agenda, and the minute he is no longer useful for that purpose he will be discarded. He is, however, unable to see this because he has been blinded by the Washington shell game.

This whole affair is nothing but a gigantic Charlie Foxtrot that hands Senate control over to the democrats to do as they wish anytime they wish. This was not a victory.

This was a defeat made possible by treason. The worst kind.

i keep saying the last set of balls died with lee atwater. when the reps took power the very first thing they did was start going at each other like dogs over a piece of meat. they have violated every goddam rule laid down by atwater and ronald reagan about presenting a united face and doing your dirty laundry behind closed doors...

and of course, the reps have the problem of the rinos, those limp-wristed cunts who just wanna be "gentlemanly" and "civil" and play their part of de massa lording it over all us unwashed field niggers who should be grateful that we get to bask in the glory of their enlightened selves. these professional politicians, our political royalty, are the true believers in the philosophy of "appeasement" and "compromise"...

i'm not too pessimistic about '08 (course, i wasn't too optimistic about '04 either...maybe my losing streak will keep up!).

It just pisses me off that Senators like McCain, Warner and Dewine just gave a hearty FUCK YOU to the President and to the Republican majority.  They knew that it was their votes that were needed to institute the Constitutional Option and they basically said, "Screw you.  We'll do it our way."  

 

I heard this last night.

I am positively furious.

That's all I can say right now. I have my health to think about.

Senate Republicans are spineless wimps (with the exception of George Allen)

One thing is for God-damned certain.  I will write a check for any Republican who runs against these seven fuckers who stabbed their party in the back.

Quoted: Senate Republicans are spineless wimps (with the exception of George Allen)

A certain contingent of them certainly seem to be spineless.

It amazes me that those who have an ideology that they are loyal to are firm in their resolve to get what they believe is right, dem or republican. But the queasy "moderates" are always in a tizzy about some damn thing or other, and seem unable to wring an ounce of consistency or victory out of their gaunt frames.

The Bible put it best: A double minded man is uncertain in all of his ways.

Quoted: One thing is for God-damned certain.  I will write a check for any Republican who runs against these seven fuckers who stabbed their party in the back.

I would give money to democrats too.

At least if a dem was elected I would have a reasonably certain idea of how the voting would go.

With the "moderate" republicans, they seem to vote according to however the media is portraying an issue.

Quoted: With the "moderate" republicans, they seem to vote according to however the media is portraying an issue.

Which is why they should change the R beside their names to a D.

Here is a list of the 7 that sold us out.

Susan Collins of Maine
Chuck Hagel of Nebraska
Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania
John Warner of Virginia
Mike DeWine of Ohio
Lisa Murkowski of Alaska
John Sununu of New Hampshire

Quoted: Here is a list of the 7 that sold us out. Susan Collins of Maine Chuck Hagel of Nebraska Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania John Warner of Virginia Mike DeWine of Ohio Lisa Murkowski of Alaska John Sununu of New Hampshire

Where is McCain?  I thought he orchestrated this circle-jerk

Quoted: Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania

SON OF A BITCH!  


GWB saved his ass during the last election - and this is how he pays us back?  

Quoted: Quoted: Here is a list of the 7 that sold us out. Susan Collins of Maine Chuck Hagel of Nebraska Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania John Warner of Virginia Mike DeWine of Ohio Lisa Murkowski of Alaska John Sununu of New Hampshire Where is McCain?  I thought he orchestrated this circle-jerk

That is about par for the course.  I saw Warner fishing on a clients property a couple weeks ago.  I was tempted to have a word or two with him but I thought it probably wouldn't be prudent.  I hope he retires afternext year.

Quoted: Here is a list of the 7 that sold us out. Susan Collins of Maine Chuck Hagel of Nebraska Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania John Warner of Virginia Mike DeWine of Ohio Lisa Murkowski of Alaska John Sununu of New Hampshire

This jackass needs to go...

-LS

I hate all politicians.

Quoted: Where is McCain?  I thought he orchestrated this circle-jerk

He did orchestrate it, however, he was
never going to vote for the rule change
anyhow. Given that fact, they must have
accidently listed him as one of the
seven democratic "moderates."

As stated, the Republicans wimped out.  

Dems should have been told to go to hell and back.  The Republicans did not win the media campaign on this and played right into the hands of the Dems.  The media and the Dems made it sound like the fillibuster was going away whereas the Republicans didn't seem to be able to explain the true constitutional duty of all of the members to vote as they are supposed to.

The Dems cried and whined because they are not in the majority except in the judicial branch of the government.  With conservative judges entering the judicial system they lose some of their majority there and are really on the outs.  This was their only way to ensure that they held onto some type of majority in the government.  Anymore it seems the big controversial decisions are made in court precendents set by liberal judges.  Losing these liberal minded judges and having more conservative thinkers means that the Democratic (socialist/progressive) agenda cannot be pushed ahead as fast as they would like.

So the Republicans get nervous because of the media coverage and also some decide that using the fillibuster on some liberal judges may come into play down the road.  I just say quit lying and tell the public the truth: that the Dems in the Senate did not do their elected job for the past few years by giving an up or down vote on these judge nominations.  

So what did we win?  We get the PRIVLEDGE of having the Dems do their job by voting on SOME of the nominees.

The Dems get to stop two "ultra" (loaded word there) conservative nominees, can still fillibuster nominees if they meet their criteria, and obviously win the media campaign since the "nuclear" option was not implemented thanks to their hard work.  In essence they can come out smelling like roses, still stop whomever they want, and made the Republicans look like idiots in the media.

While many of us understand the reasoning behind the so called "nuclear" option and why it was IMHO the right thing to do most of the sheeple don't even understand that the Senate must approve the president's court nominations.  

John McCain is a punk...  Never before as an opportunity to govern been so wasted as what has happened following the 04 elections.  I will be staying home in 06 and 08 regardless of who is running.

Quoted: Quoted: Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania SON OF A BITCH!   GWB saved his ass during the last election - and this is how he pays us back?

Did anyone really expect anything different from old "Scottish Law" Specter?

Quoted: Quoted: Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania SON OF A BITCH!   GWB saved his ass during the last election - and this is how he pays us back?

Yes, and it can't really be a surprise to anyone. Specter has always been a guy who folds to the other side when pressure is most intense. In this, he is doing his usual thing.

Which is why I was none to happy with the White House for trying to save him. He is a fair weather friend, only dependable until it is important and then he bails. We don't need that.

Quoted: Quoted: Here is a list of the 7 that sold us out. Susan Collins of Maine Chuck Hagel of Nebraska Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania John Warner of Virginia Mike DeWine of Ohio Lisa Murkowski of Alaska John Sununu of New Hampshire This jackass needs to go... -LS

I am inclined to agree that Warner's time is up. He has increasingly become a source of embarassment and woe when the chips are down.

And I don't buy the arguement that without Warner Norfolk Naval base will close down. That's just bloody blackmail.

Is there any likelyhood that we will take the 7 up/down votes, THEN nail them for the other two?

Probably not, but I can always dream.

Rush is going to go ballistic. I'll be welded to my radio this afternoon.....

Fucking backstabbing limpwristed RINO scumbags.....

This is going to resonate all around DC for weeks.  There are several potential sub-issues and "gotchas" in the soup too:

-What will happen when Bush nominates his next crop of appelate court justices.

-What is the definition of "extraordinary circumstances"?  How will each side define "extreme" and "out of the mainstream" jurists?

-What will this group of RINOs and 'moderate" Dems do when the Supreme Court nominees come up for Advice and Consent?

-What will the political fallout be for the RINOs?  (I for one will not vote for Warner again.  I won't vote for a Dem but Warner has lost my vote.  He chose to ignore my letter last week and will now pay the consequences of his action.  How many other voters will react thus?)

-How will the White House react?  If I were Bush and his team, I'd be nominating Alberto Gonzalez to the Supreme Court as soon as Chief Justice Rehnquist finally calls it quits.  Let the Left try and stop him again.

This matter is far from closed.  As has been stated in the media...we have only "kicked the can down the street".  I can assure you Dusty Harry and the rest of his liberal cabal will NOT permit a good conservative jurist to ascend to the SCOTUS without another major battle.  Ask any of them why?  Last night, one of the libs got it right (for them) when he stated that they held the line, if only temporarily on ROE V. WADE.  

THAT my friends continues to be the gorilla in the closet.  THAT is the single most important issue to the Left.  THAT is the issue they will NOT budge on.

This ain't hardly over...so stay tuned!

Quoted: Here is a list of the 7 that sold us out. Susan Collins of Maine Chuck Hagel of Nebraska Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania John Warner of Virginia Mike DeWine of Ohio Lisa Murkowski of Alaska John Sununu of New Hampshire

I will not be sending any money to the Republican Party till DeWine and these others are gone!  This guy gave me a big F@@@ You! on the AWB.  He said that he had been getting a lot of calls telling him to not endorse a new AWB but he thought that they were wrong.  I am so sick of RINO's.  Why can't we get Libertarian or Constitution Party candidates for Congress and Senate?

Quoted: Why can't we get Libertarian or Constitution Party candidates for Congress and Senate?

Because unfortunately doing so will require handing the entire government over to the libs while we fight it out amongst ourselves.

We are so screwed. One part wants to behead us, and our own is willing to slowly bleed us to death.

Pathetic.

My letter, just sent out, to Arlen Sphincter:

Way to go.  Way to bow to the pressure of the Democratic party.  They were defeated in the House, Senate and Presidential elections for a REASON!  We have a mandate.  We won.  Why can't you act like it?  Compromise?!?  They are obstructing the nominations!  There is nothing nuclear about changing the rules that they themselves wanted to change in 1994.  I'd like to know what the compromise is.  They get to block two judges.  What did we get?  We could have triggered the 'nuclear' option if they obstructed again, and held votes for ALL of the nominees.  But instead, you decide to 'play nice' with the Democratic Party. Unbelievable.  You are a major reason that the Republican Party is able to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory again and again.  What a sellout you are.  Why don't you just go back to the Democratic Party, where you came from? My wife and I were major contributors to the GOP this last election.  Unfortunately, I also backed YOU.  I won't make that mistake again.  We will be giving no more support to the GOP until things change, and I'm not going to hold my breath for that. Although the Democrats are wrong on almost every issue, they at least know how to take charge when they win elections!  Unfortunately, due to spineless legislators such as yourself,  they can remain in charge even when they are in the minority. I am so furious that I don't have a party to represent me.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: The Republican Senate leadership had no say so in the matter... thanks to McCain and other RINOs Frist did not have the votes... it is that simple. McCain saw to it Frist was cut off at the knees. Bingo. It is hard to blame the Republican majority for this one. Seven "republican" senators made the decision for the majority. It makes Frist look bad since he was not able to reign in the seven, but what are you going to do with a bunch of spineless RINOs. EXACTLY!  It's amazing how frigging ignorant some of our membership here is--considering how much we discuss politics.  Christ people, the simple fact is, it takes 60 votes to accomplish anything the Dems are willing to dig their heels in on--and we have a total of 55 Repubs, and several of them are quite liberal and willing to go against the leadership.  That's the fact.  It does NOT mean all Repubs are turncoats who are not doing what we elected them to do.  Political realities are exactly that--REALITIES.  "I'll never vote for another Republican" is just silly and uninformed and frankly, childish.

Yeah, but these traitors to the party moderates need to have their feet held to the fire blowtorch.

I'm not saying that I'm not going to vote for another Republican, but until they figure out how to lead, and also pull their collective heads out of their asses over illegal immigration, I'm not giving them another penny.  They are still calling me all the time wanting more money.  What good is it if they win, if they don't act like it?