People aren't sure what the cloture vote will be, but people fully expect him to pass cloture. He already has 57 confirmed "yes" votes, and they need at least three more to vote for cloture.
Yes, their intention is to further debate, not impose the will of the minority on the majority. Everyone's gotten their chance to weigh in on Alito, and Americans support his confirmation by 2-1.
Date: January 30th, 2006 5:12 PM Author: splenetic box office
yes. we know that. we follow this shit. they poll assholes who have no idea what any of this means. if they understood the ramifications, you wouldn't see a 2-1 in favor.
How do you know his actual intentions re abortion? Dems beefed up the whole '85 job application, and he took the line that he would not commit to overruling (or upholding) that precedent before a case comes before him. Seems people are fine with it.
Date: January 30th, 2006 5:14 PM Author: splenetic box office
Bush nominated him and the wingnuts were filled with glee. The same could not be said for Miers, who was a bit more wishy washy... obviously in addition to being utterly unqualified.
The wingnuts were filled with glee, but you think that some damning evidence would be found to support the notion that they somehow know he'll overturn Roe (which is unlikely since they don't have five votes to do so). They seemed glad to have a mainstream conservative jurist being promoted to the bench, there was no "ROE PWNED!" consensus forming.
I'm sure they're confident that he'll vote against it. But again, this is an awfully flimsy disqualifier. "Alito's supporters think he'll overturn Roe! We must filibuster!" Think about what precedent that would set.
Is it possible that abortion isn't the make-it-break-it issue for the American public when it comes to a Supreme Court justice? Falling back on the ignorance of the average American, as you did above, is a decidedly weak argument for your position.
The American public has shown itself to be either apathetic toward or actively in favor of the 'erosion' of the rights created in Roe. Shocking that most people don't actually want abortion on demand.
Date: January 30th, 2006 5:24 PM Author: splenetic box office
It's just the most obvious example. What about being spied on? What about the president getting vastly greater powers than the Constitution affords him? Abortion strikes a nerve in everyone, whether or not they pay close attention to this shit, but having this guy on teh court will fuck our country in the long run in ways far more important than fucking killing babies. Jesus.
al Qaeda members aren't on my speed dial, nor is he for most Americans, which is why the NSA wiretap issue has been a nonstarter for Democrats and Bush is polling around 50% now. Plus, the whole "unitary executive" concept that Alito supposedly favors isn't nearly as ominous as Kennedy, et al, make it out to be. If the wiretapping issue hadn't recently reared its head, they would barely be making a peep out of it. You have to accept that the Dems were flailing for some reason, any reason, to vote against the obviously qualified and likeable Alito. I'm not surprised someone so blindly faithful has bought the line so easily.
Date: January 30th, 2006 5:31 PM Author: splenetic box office
dude, i haven't bought the line. i think he's a very worthy candidate. but not to replace a swing vote. he's more clarence thomas than sandra day o'connor.
if he wanted to replace anotehr asshole with this asshole, fine. that's not what we're dealing with.
academically, i recognize that he's "qualified" and "likeable" (although I have no fucking idea why likeability matters two shits.) that doesnt' mean he's a worthy replacement under the circumstances.
The court's balance is irrelevant, and it's to be expected that a two-term president will probably be able to nominate two SCOTUS justices during his tenure. No one griped when Ginsburg replaced Byron White, and current events are immaterial for a lifetime appointment of whom you admit is an obviously qualified nominee.
Edit: Also, do you really think Miers would be less supportive of Bush's war powers than Alito were she confirmed?
It's not that bad, Kennedy is now the swing vote instead of O'Connor. If Stevens or Ginsburg keels over in the next few years, then you should really start worrying.
Support Mark Warner. He's the only candidate with decent odds of breaking the Republicans' southern stronghold, unless he goes up against George Allen.
It's sad that our presidents all have to come from hick states.
Date: February 1st, 2006 2:13 AM Author: smoky provocative school cafeteria azn
I am a pretty hard lefty, with a few moderate leanings. Even I had some serious difficulty voting for John Kerry. I honestly didn't think he was fit to be president and would do some pretty horrible things. The only reason I voted for him was because Bush was scaring me with this good v. evil garbage.
Is the most annoying line in the dems arsenal. There is no mandate, constitutional or political, for the court to have a certain ideological mix. If anything, Bush's victory indicates that Americans want a more conservative court. That's what we'll be getting.
The Dems looked pathetic, perhaps marginally pro-terror, in bringing up the NSA issue at the hearings. I see it as a problem too, but opposition doesn't play well in Peoria.
"but having this guy on teh court will fuck our country in the long run in ways far more important than fucking killing babies"
Until people like you realize that there is /nothing/ more impotrant that the lives on children then you will get no support from people like me (i.e., average joe).
Right, the dems purpose is not to "filibuster" but to "further debate the 'idealogue'"
If you're going to be blatantly usurping the senate floor to further your aims of tabling a supreme court justice, at least go ahead and be honest about it. Don't cloak it in terms of "furthering debate" just to make your move more palatable to the American public.
Date: January 30th, 2006 5:39 PM Author: Rose masturbator selfie
The constitutional burden has been met. You presumably want more debate for substantive reasons. Congressional debate has only the facade of substance. Your reasons won't be satisfied.
Exactly. It's pretty ridiculous that they actually need to start a motion for cloiture, but you can bet that the senate democratic leadership is fuming at the "rebel" senators right now.
Yes, the dems behaviour throughout Alito's nomination has tended to make them look pretty bad. As long as he's intellectually honest, the opposition based on ideology doesn't really make sense. The repubs hold the presidency and the majority of congress for a reason, after all. There are other issues that are far more important than this one, and the filibusterers are painting the entire party with a sore-loser brush.
Date: January 30th, 2006 5:22 PM Author: splenetic box office
I don't think there's a single issue more important than this right now.
This impacts everything about everything. Fuck. Bush can break the law and ideologue judges will say it's somehow in his war powers, or if not there somewhere else. Yeah, that's not activism... Brilliant. Thanks, wingnuts.
I'm a lot more concerned about possible over-deference to executive power than I am about Roe. And honestly I couldn't tell from his answers whether Alito was too far in the pale on this one. It's really enough for me that he is considered intellectually honest by his colleagues on the 3d. If he is a wingnut on war powers, I doubt he'll tip the balance since we're probably already fucked in that regard.
Credited. No one gave a fuck when liberal minority members of the 3rd circuit testified in his favor, discrediting the opaque notion of his bigotry and intolerance that various committee members and witnesses with little relation to Alito suggested. Unless one is reflexively against anyone Bush nominates and conservatives support, it's difficult to find him as evil as people like NicoBlue make him out to be.
Date: January 30th, 2006 5:54 PM Author: Vigorous tattoo
Not to brag, but I was MVP in 2 leagues and 2 tournaments in the last 2 years, so I have no idea which you are talking about. Again they were asian leagues, so its not all that. Its not for my firm, but if I was wearing a blue firm jersey, that was just for a day and I am not working for that firm anymore, anyhow.
Date: January 30th, 2006 6:00 PM Author: Vigorous tattoo
no because I am not that offensive anymore, and I have never and will never admit my identity on this board. Worst comes to worst there will be a HACKED ACCOUNT with a bunch of deleted posts. oh well.
It is kinda ridiculous, but the whole "red state/blue state" dichotomy is extremely misleading, as there's only a handful of states that voted for Bush, have a Republican governor, and two Republican senators (and same for their "blue" equivalents).
Date: January 30th, 2006 5:47 PM Author: smoky provocative school cafeteria azn
I think they just voted so you guys could finally shut up already. This outcome was known for weeks, but somehow its helped bush stay high in the polls for months.
Date: January 30th, 2006 5:50 PM Author: smoky provocative school cafeteria azn
because the news orgs can obsessively talk about the one thing that is apparently going well for Bush, rather than about all the other shit that isn't.
Reid probably would have been more savvy to let Alito get confirmed right before Christmas, when no one has time to watch the news, instead of the day of Bush's state of the union address. I understand they needed the time to dig up as much dirt as possible, but he should have known that Republicans had vetted Alito's past extensively and knew nothing would pop up.
Democrats got thoroughly worked over. You know it's a problem when Senator "KKK" Byrd gets up in a meeting and decries the Democrats who opposed Alito as being "without dignity"