home

Frist and the Republican Myth of a Senate Standstill

By Jeralyn, Section Other Politics
Posted on Mon Apr 25, 2005 at 10:01:19 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

Senator Bill Frist and the Republicans would have the American people believe that if the nuclear option passes and the Senate rules are changed to prevent filibustering of judges, that the Democrats will bring the Senate to a standstill.

It's simply not true. What will end is the Democrats' deference to the Republicans in setting the legislative agenda.

This morning I had the opportunity to participate in a blogger conference call with Sen. Harry Reid. Here is some of what I learned during the call.

Traditionally, the party in power sets the agenda. So far during this Administration, the Democrats have gone along, and as a result, the Republicans were able to pass bankruptcy reform and their highway and class action bills.

If Frist and the Republicans insist on bringing the nuclear option to a vote and win, the Democrats will no longer allow the Republicans to set the agenda. Using a Senate procedural rule called Rule XIV, the Democrats will introduce their own bills and insist that they be heard and voted upon. Not just any bills, but bills on issues the Democrats care deeply about.

Last week the Democrats introduced nine bills, including bills to lower gas prices, reduce the cost of health care and help veterans. If the nuclear option becomes a reality, the Democrats, rather than deferring to the Republican legislative wish list, will insist these new bills be voted up or down.

This is not bringing Senate business to a standstill. This is a matter of ending deference. These bills are not obstuctionist measures. They are bills on issues the Democrats care deeply about, but would normally be on the back burner or introduced as amendments to other bills because the party in power usually sets the agenda.

If the Republicans want to continue to set the legislative agenda in Congress, they can forego the nuclear option and business will proceed as usual.

The Democrats, and Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid in particular, are wise and well within their rights to stand firm on the right to filibuster extremist judicial nominations. It has been an option in this country for 217 years. It is essential to our system of checks and balances.

All 45 Democratic Senators are firmly behind the right to filibuster. Some Republicans are on board as well. Senator John McCain is one. We need to reach out to other principled Republicans, so that Sen. Frist will see the folly of his ways and not insist on a nuclear option vote.

Now is the time to let your Republican Senators know that you, as a constituent, oppose the nuclear option. Call or write your Senator and tell him or her. You can quickly call any of your Senators through the Senate switchboard operator, (202) 224-3121.

But first and foremost, help dispel the myth. The Democrats are not threatening to bring the Senate to a standstill. They will no longer show deference to the Republican legislative agenda and instead will seek hearings and votes on their own bills.

Update: Other takes on the conference call: Chris Bowers at MyDD; Ben at Al Franken's blog on AirAmericaRadio; Armando at Daily Kos;

< Celebrity Blogging Begins May 9 | 'Pablo Escobar' of Afghan Heroin Trade Arrested >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Frist and the Republican Myth of a Senate Standstill | 52 comments (52 topical)
    Re: Frist and the Republican Myth of a Senate Sta (none / 0) (#1)
    by wishful on Mon Apr 25, 2005 at 10:38:10 AM EST
    In a way, it is too bad that the Senate Democrats can't, in business as usual, introduce bills on issues that they care deeply about, forcing hearings and votes on them. I mean this in a healthy democracy kind of way.

    Re: Frist and the Republican Myth of a Senate Sta (none / 0) (#2)
    by The Heretik on Mon Apr 25, 2005 at 10:44:32 AM EST
    The Democrats finally seem to realize that something can actually be done besides roll over. Reid frankly has been a pleasant surprise. Of course if the Democrats actually start to do something, parody and satire would no longer have a chance and the bitterness some of us have held might abate. If only a bit. . . And I was just starting to enjoy, if that's the right word, Bush and all his joke, Bush and his THe War on Everything TM. Democrats are going to need a sense of outrage if we are going to see a better tomorrow. We will all need a sense of humor to make it through these outrageous days.

    Re: Frist and the Republican Myth of a Senate Sta (none / 0) (#3)
    by Joe Bob on Mon Apr 25, 2005 at 10:47:35 AM EST
    So then what keeps the Republicans from using the double top secret nuclear option and eliminating Rule XIV?

    Re: Frist and the Republican Myth of a Senate Sta (none / 0) (#4)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Apr 25, 2005 at 10:49:02 AM EST
    The only thing more dangerous than a disenfranchised conservative is one in power. People keep forgetting the definition of a conservative: One who seeks to preserve existing customs and/or seeks a return to traditional customs. Anyone who is surprised by Republican machinations in the House and Senate (and in the gerrymandering explosion) needs to pay attention- The Conservatives have no intention, now that they're in power, of relinquishing that power, and the only question of how far they'll go is how far they are permitted to go. The Democrats should be introducing their own bill anyway, and if this brings the conservative juggernaut to a shuddering halt, so much the better. Democracy is government "by the people," not "by some of the people." The party in party is always duty-bound to serve ALL citizens, not just the ones who support it...where was this lost on America?

    Re: Frist and the Republican Myth of a Senate Sta (none / 0) (#5)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Apr 25, 2005 at 10:51:37 AM EST
    Yeah, too bad for Reid & Co. that they are already on record, threatening to bring Senate business to a standstill. Regardless, it's quite amusing to watch this bit of backpedaling. Mr. Reid's getting weak in the knees!

    Re: Frist and the Republican Myth of a Senate Sta (none / 0) (#6)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Apr 25, 2005 at 10:52:24 AM EST
    If this is the case, why don't they use such an option now? Why wait? And what would it matter anyway? It's not as if the Democrats can pass bills on their own. They don't have the votes required. The end result is just more gridlock, which is not always a bad thing. Who knows, maybe Harry will be able to force Frist into doing something useful, like the appropriations bills that must be passed within the next 5 months.

    Re: Frist and the Republican Myth of a Senate Sta (none / 0) (#7)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Apr 25, 2005 at 11:06:46 AM EST
    Blaghdaddy Right on point! WEll said Actually I was going to say exactly the same thing. LOL :)

    Re: Frist and the Republican Myth of a Senate Sta (none / 0) (#8)
    by wishful on Mon Apr 25, 2005 at 11:07:28 AM EST
    justpaul says:
    If this is the case, why don't they use such an option now? Why wait?
    And what would it matter anyway? It's not as if the Democrats can pass bills on their own. They don't have the votes required
    .
    One benefit for the American people (remember us?) would be that each Senator's opinion would be revealed by his votes on issues that the majority would rather not have brought up. Maybe this would be healthy for democracy, as opposed to furtherance of all-partisan-all-the-time.

    Re: Frist and the Republican Myth of a Senate Sta (none / 0) (#9)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Apr 25, 2005 at 11:09:19 AM EST
    Justpaul I aint over till it,s over! Reid and other reasonable senators are hoping the repigs will get their senses back.

    Re: Frist and the Republican Myth of a Senate Sta (none / 0) (#10)
    by Walter on Mon Apr 25, 2005 at 11:14:47 AM EST
    I would think that the senate at a standstill would be a libertarians dream come true. That's why I voted for Kerry.

    Re: Frist and the Republican Myth of a Senate Sta (none / 0) (#11)
    by kdog on Mon Apr 25, 2005 at 11:26:36 AM EST
    The end result is just more gridlock, which is not always a bad thing
    I'll go a step further and say gridlock is a good thing. The less Congress does the better off we all are. When they "get things done" quickly in Washington, that usually means trouble.

    Re: Frist and the Republican Myth of a Senate Sta (none / 0) (#12)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Apr 25, 2005 at 11:31:30 AM EST
    Wishful, I suppose that's true, but then the Democrats had better be very careful in choosing which bills to bring up this way. For they will be showing their hand as well as forcing the Republicans to show theirs. As I said, some good could come of this if, for example, Reid were to use it to push the real business of the American people (yes, I remember "us" quite well, being neither a Republican nor a Democrat) rather than some socialist fantasy legislation that stands no chance of being passed or the latest conservative pipe-dream. If, instead, Harry pushes for votes on the kind of things that make most liberals salivate, he will do nothing but push the Democrats further into the wilderness, and that's a shame because in the process he will be leaving even more of the playing field to the Republicans. But I sometimes wonder if that's the plan anyway, as it then makes Hillary as a centrist more plausible. (Could it be that the Democrats have actually found a Karl Rove of their own?) In the end, I think Frist may just be stupid enough to go the "nuclear" route, which will be a disservice to us all. If he does, I won't hold my breath waiting for the Democrats to bring it back when they regain power, as they have given me no reason to believe that they are any less power hungry than they have always been and the rhetoric will change the moment they take power, just as it did when Bush became the one nominating judges and those formerly opposed to blocking votes on judges became the ones all in favor of it. The moral of this story: When Republicans and Democrats play, we all lose.

    Re: Frist and the Republican Myth of a Senate Sta (none / 0) (#13)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Apr 25, 2005 at 11:33:16 AM EST
    When they "get things done" quickly in Washington, that usually means trouble. Here-here Kdog. Case in point: the Patriot Act. Brought to you by a bipartisan knee-jerk reaction. Gridlock can be a good thing indeed. Enjoy the day people. I'm outta here for now.

    Re: Frist and the Republican Myth of a Senate Sta (none / 0) (#14)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Apr 25, 2005 at 11:36:15 AM EST
    Hey, Horse with no name. It's a ballgame. As it moves along, tactics change, but the strategy remains the same: keep the Repubs on defense where they cannont score. Reid is a ballplayer. He's winning now and will continue to do so. Since his opposition continues to understimate how tough he is, he'll remain in the lead. Go Harry!

    Re: Frist and the Republican Myth of a Senate Sta (none / 0) (#15)
    by kdog on Mon Apr 25, 2005 at 12:04:02 PM EST
    I'm definitely with you on this one jpaul...three cheers for gridlock...it's safer that way.

    Re: Frist and the Republican Myth of a Senate Sta (none / 0) (#16)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Apr 25, 2005 at 12:25:58 PM EST
    JustPaul, Kdog and Heretik... Well said! One of the more productive threads I've seen for a while. The sad thing is - I remember when Gingrich et al "shut down" government. Like the NHL strike, the net effect on the American public is.... zip. My only addition - is that the price of freedom is eternal vigilance, not just against the external threats to our country but internal threats to our democratic republic.

    Re: Frist and the Republican Myth of a Senate Sta (none / 0) (#17)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Apr 25, 2005 at 12:26:11 PM EST
    So then what keeps the Republicans from using the double top secret nuclear option and eliminating Rule XIV? JoeBob: Nothing. Reid entertained exactly that question today, and the only thing preventing Frist and the nucleo-cons using the nuclear option again and again is their estimation of what they might suffer politicially for it. Yeah, too bad for Reid & Co. that they are already on record, threatening to bring Senate business to a standstill. Horse: The problem with your supposition is that the American people will be able to turn on C-SPAN2 any time they like, and see... the Senate working. Not at all like it was when Mom & Pop tried to take the kids out to the National Park during the Gingrich shutdown. If this is the case, why don't they use such an option now? Why wait? justpaul: Waiting for the Republicans to go nuclear before exercising this option allows Democrats to maintain a consistent position of operating under the rules as they've traditionally been understood. While there's disagreement about whether that's the case with respect to filibustering judicial nominations, there's none as to the use of Rule XIV.

    Re: Frist and the Republican Myth of a Senate Sta (none / 0) (#18)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Apr 25, 2005 at 12:37:31 PM EST
    Blaghdaddy thinks the Democrats have to get the message out that 10 out of over 200 nominations (less than 5%) have been blocked by Democrats...that's reall "advise and consent." The over-riding message should be- "Is the Senate a rubber-stamp on the President's nominations, or do some nominations perhaps need to be sent back to the President to re-consider?" If the Republicans want to say that "ALL" nominations should be voted up or down, Democrats should ask about the over-60 Clinton nominations that died in Committee. Jesus H. Christ, America, wake the hell up and see what your conservative government is doing to the fabric of both society and the rule of law in the nation...they are willing to pull the entire house of cards down if they can't get their way. Democrats need to stand strong. Polls right now show that the public is not supporting a change to the filibuster rules, and any attempt to ram this through will hurt the Republicans in '06. If Dems can't make headway with the Delay scandal, nuclear filibustering, the Schiavo fiasco and the gov't's staggering budgetary woes, it will mean only one thing- that America don't give a S*%t and it's time to start looking for property in British Columbia...if it's good enough for Ally McBeal and Indiana Jones (plus the high-grade is way better), maybe it's good enough for the rest of us. :-)

    Re: Frist and the Republican Myth of a Senate Sta (none / 0) (#19)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Apr 25, 2005 at 01:05:24 PM EST
    I hope somebody cornered Reid during this blogger love chat and pressed him on why he can't seem to keep Dinos like Lieberman and now, apparently, Biden from jumping into every debate and offering compromise to the Republicans on issues the Dems are clearly winning. With clowns like those two pimping the idea that the Dems should split the difference and give Bush a few of his nominees, it's virtually impossible to build up any momentum and slow the Republican gutting of America. Let's face it, the Repubs don't keep their word these days at all, so any deal made today is 100% guaranteed broken tomorrow.

    Re: Frist and the Republican Myth of a Senate Sta (none / 0) (#20)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Apr 25, 2005 at 01:48:58 PM EST
    I don't get them either, Bill. They seem really sincere though so I don't think they're corrupt, just misguided IMHO

    Re: Frist and the Republican Myth of a Senate Sta (none / 0) (#21)
    by zak822 on Mon Apr 25, 2005 at 02:02:16 PM EST
    I'm in with Bahgdaddy, the Dems have to tell the public the President and his minions are fighting because they can't have that last 5%. They have to do what the GOP does, go on TV and say it over and over and over or the message won't get out. I don't hink the problem is that America doesn't care. I think the problem is there are still too many Democrats who think they can get something out of a compromise with todays GOP. No heart for the fight.

    Re: Frist and the Republican Myth of a Senate Sta (none / 0) (#22)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Apr 25, 2005 at 02:31:17 PM EST
    Blaghdaddy says Zac's right on the money. Look, liberals' greatest strength and their greatest weakness is that they govern, not to deny rights, but to bestow rights to those who would be otherwise denied- conservatives govern for themselves and to keep their kabals in power...to them, it's not what they can give you, but what they can prevent you from doing... In fact, read Blaghdaddy's dissertation on conservatives and American Democracy and you'll see what he's saying.

    Re: Frist and the Republican Myth of a Senate Sta (none / 0) (#23)
    by desertswine on Mon Apr 25, 2005 at 02:43:22 PM EST
    Biden is a whiny little pissant who thinks you can still compromise with the Frist right-wing. And you can't. His lure is that sometimes he sounds smart as he makes his usual rounds on the talking head shows.

    Re: Frist and the Republican Myth of a Senate Sta (none / 0) (#24)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Apr 25, 2005 at 04:12:57 PM EST
    Blaghdaddy writes - "Blaghdaddy thinks the Democrats have to get the message out that 10 out of over 200 nominations (less than 5%) have been blocked by Democrats...that's reall "advise and consent." The constitution doesn't say that 5% should be blocked. It says, advise and consent. BTW - 10 of 200 is exactly 5%.... BTW - The number being resubmitted is 7, not 10. BTW - BC is lovely in the summer. I think you would enjoy it immensely. Bill L and mfox - Don't worry. The so-called comprimise is not going to be accepted.

    Re: Frist and the Republican Myth of a Senate Sta (none / 0) (#25)
    by nolo on Mon Apr 25, 2005 at 04:31:40 PM EST
    Implicit in "advise and consent" is the ability to withhold consent. Otherwise there'd be no reason to provide for the "advise and consent" function in the first place. Moreover, nothing in the Constitution establishes the procedure by which the Senate (which was meant to be a deliberative body) is to determine whether it will give its consent.

    Re: Frist and the Republican Myth of a Senate Sta (none / 0) (#26)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Apr 25, 2005 at 04:44:02 PM EST
    The question of keeping Dems together and united on this issue did come up in the call, and the unequivocal answer was that there is 100% agreement on the strategy. Everyone is ultimately on board with the leadership here. How that squares with the comments is a matter of interpretation, but that was the answer.

    Re: Frist and the Republican Myth of a Senate Sta (none / 0) (#27)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Apr 25, 2005 at 04:52:37 PM EST
    nolo - If you had some ham you would have some ham and egss if you had some eggs. The method is called "voting." Now that may be strange to you, but everything is not settled in court. That is the only way the entire Senante can act.

    Re: Frist and the Republican Myth of a Senate Sta (none / 0) (#28)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Apr 25, 2005 at 05:10:49 PM EST
    Blaghdaddy's disappointed, PPJ...look at what you posted yourself...Blaghdaddy said 10 out of OVER 200...less than 5%. And there is no set number of nominations that have to be denied or approved...but doesn't less than five percent of total nominations seem like a very reasonable number with which to have a problem? Where does it say that ALL nominations SHOULD be approved, especially when the Repubs killed DOZENS of Clinton nominations in Committee? So, according to you nuts, over 60 is fine, as long as the Republicans were blocking them, but 10 is an egregious threat to the Constitution? Are you playing Devil's Advocate again, PPJ, or are you really that stupid?

    Re: Frist and the Republican Myth of a Senate Sta (none / 0) (#29)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Apr 25, 2005 at 05:17:46 PM EST
    People like PPJ are why the left must ALWAYS be vigilant, folks...this whole "filibuster" kerfuffle is just another example of conservatives using their power to abuse and subvert it to their ends... They let dozens of federal court benches sit vacant during the Clinton years, saying, 'Go blow.' And now, Bush has to have the whole cake or he's going to sit on it. America's traditions are at risk because they interfere with the conservative agenda...no plainer than that, folks...get used to it.

    Re: Frist and the Republican Myth of a Senate Sta (none / 0) (#30)
    by wishful on Mon Apr 25, 2005 at 05:49:39 PM EST
    Blaghdaddy, just one minor but nonetheless important point: please replace "conservative" with "radical right". It is more accurate.

    Re: Frist and the Republican Myth of a Senate Sta (none / 0) (#31)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Apr 25, 2005 at 06:02:04 PM EST
    "repigs", Ed. Wow, you've outdone yoursef. Try not to get a headache. Blag, do I have to clean up after you yet again? Conservatives are for American traditions; that's why they're in the majority. Leftists try to avoid facing this fact with lame excuses like "they must have stolen it", but never offer any proof. Wishful, you are aptly named calling conservatives the "radical" right. Sounds nice, hot rhetoric, but, sorry, not accurate.

    Re: Frist and the Republican Myth of a Senate Sta (none / 0) (#32)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Apr 25, 2005 at 06:13:05 PM EST
    Once again, Ace, you miss the point...exactly that conservatives stand for tradition...like they did in 1861 when their precious tradition was slavery, like they did in the Civil Rights struggle when their pet tradition was Protestand White Supremacy...just 'cause it's a tradition don't make it a good one. And the conseratives are in power, they'll be out again, they'll get back in...whoever's in power doesn't set the agenda fovever...if they did, you'd be living in Clintonia...remember when the liberals had control of everything? They pretty much left it the way they found it...not scorched earth like the right....

    Re: Frist and the Republican Myth of a Senate Sta (none / 0) (#34)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Apr 25, 2005 at 06:22:36 PM EST
    Blag, it's not my responsibility to instruct you in the basics; you're supposed to know a few things before you rant, such as: Lincoln was a Republican, and Republicans are the party that freed the slaves. The Dems were the pro-slavery party. It was Republicans who made the civil-rightsa advances possible. Al Gore's father, Dem senator from TN, voted against every civil rights legislation. Byrd filibustered against them. Clinton sold military secrets to the Chinese. So traditions are good when they suit your notions, Blag, but when the debate runs against you, they're no good? Blag, either shake off the dogma or, as I mentioned yesterday, return to the TV. You're just not up to speed for this.

    Re: Frist and the Republican Myth of a Senate Sta (none / 0) (#36)
    by The Heretik on Mon Apr 25, 2005 at 06:32:01 PM EST
    Jesus H. Christ, America, wake the hell up and see what your conservative government is doing to the fabric of both society and the rule of law in the nation...they are willing to pull the entire house of cards down if they can't get their way. Actually, the problem in our country is more like Jesus H. Bush You would have to go back well past the institutions of republican democracy for the level of presumption embodied in our current reigning leaders. Let's go back to Louis the Sixteenth and the divine right of kings or is it well connnected sons? Oy. Apres moi, le deluge.

    Re: Frist and the Republican Myth of a Senate Sta (none / 0) (#37)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Apr 25, 2005 at 06:33:37 PM EST
    And uh, Ace, how many Chinese flew airplanes into the World Trade Towers? Wait a minute...WHO'S THAT at the Crawford Ranch? My my my, Ace wants to talk about traitors... "How much for those barrels of oil, Prince?" "Another few thousand American soldiers' lives should do it, Georgie." "I feel cold- hold my hand..." "Thanks again for those planes on nine-eleven-plus-one..." "Hey, what are friends for?" Ace, you're all wet

    Re: Frist and the Republican Myth of a Senate Sta (none / 0) (#38)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Apr 25, 2005 at 06:35:14 PM EST
    Bull Connor was a DEMOCRAT, Blag. Richard Nixon actually felt shame at the possibility of being impeached, (unlike another prez), and he actually cared about whether or not the left liked him. Leftists knew that, saw it as a weakness, and exploited it, attacking him viciously. Remember, this is the man who proposed drug treatment rather than incarceration, and who opened diplomatic relations with the Chinese. GWB learned well from the left's treatment of Nixon, and that is why GWB doesn't give a rat's arse about the left's pathological hatred of him. Maybe peeve at what the left did to Nixon is not entirely without reason. The left talks a good story, Blag, but when you start looking at what they DO rather than what they SAY, you see a few things you maybe didn't know before. I know. I've been there. And before you fly off the handle, remember, I'm just the messenger.

    Re: Frist and the Republican Myth of a Senate Sta (none / 0) (#40)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Apr 25, 2005 at 06:43:15 PM EST
    Heal thyself, Blag.

    Re: Frist and the Republican Myth of a Senate Sta (none / 0) (#41)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Apr 25, 2005 at 06:43:47 PM EST
    And uh, Ace, you youself have brought up all the heroic things past Republicans have done... WHAT HAPPENED? WHERE DID THEY GO? WE WANT OUR HUMAN REPUBLICANS BACK!!

    Re: Frist and the Republican Myth of a Senate Sta (none / 0) (#33)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Apr 25, 2005 at 07:50:53 PM EST
    One last point, people, about Blaghdaddy's view of the right and tradition. Rules and laws are traditions, are they not? If so, wouldn't the "values" and "American tradition" party want to honor those traditions? Instead, they: 1. CHANGED the rules on the Ethics Committee, since this was the only way Delay was going to stop getting his hand slapped. Now that they've changed the rules, Delay is screaming for an Ethics hearing so that the new Committee can whitewash him. Sound like American values, Ace? 2. WANT TO CHANGE the rules so they can approve Adolf Lawbody and all their other friends WITHOUT any check on the most extreme judges they choose...imagine if the Democratic Senate, when it had the votes, had banned the filibuster and appointed by party line the most ardent abortionist judges they could find? Would the conservatives have left ANYTHING standing? Again, Ace, great American traditional values. 3. TRIED TO CHANGE American judicial precedent by violating one of their most sacred traditions, States' rights (after all, 600,000 Americans died so the South could fight for its right to enslave humans), all in order to change a legal ruling they didn't like. Again, Ace, wonderful American tradition there, 4. Had enough, or should Blaghdaddy keep going? The "values" party has none but self-gratification. Ace?

    Re: Frist and the Republican Myth of a Senate Sta (none / 0) (#42)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Apr 25, 2005 at 07:54:03 PM EST
    mfox wrote: "One of the more productive threads I've seen for a while." Would you like to retract that, mfox?

    Re: Frist and the Republican Myth of a Senate Sta (none / 0) (#43)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Apr 25, 2005 at 08:52:14 PM EST
    Blaghdaddy, you got to watch your language here....no insults, name-calling or bad words.. House rules, ok?

    Re: Frist and the Republican Myth of a Senate Sta (none / 0) (#44)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Apr 25, 2005 at 08:52:22 PM EST
    Blaghdaddy - I was gonna give you a twirl on your blog, but when I realized I had to sign up, etc., decided the effort wasn't worth it. That might give you a hint of my opinion.

    Re: Frist and the Republican Myth of a Senate Sta (none / 0) (#45)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Apr 25, 2005 at 08:54:11 PM EST
    TL - Sorry, guess I am guilty of piling on.

    Re: Frist and the Republican Myth of a Senate Sta (none / 0) (#39)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Apr 25, 2005 at 08:54:18 PM EST
    I don't give a rat's a** who belonged to what political party...we're talking ideology - conservatism vs. liberalism...all those Democrats you mentioned were white, CONSERVATIVE politicians- they weren't liberals, and being Democrats by party didn't make them liberals. Or are you not able to differentiate between parties and ideology? [insults and profanity deleted]

    Re: Frist and the Republican Myth of a Senate Sta (none / 0) (#46)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Apr 25, 2005 at 09:38:18 PM EST
    Blaghdaddy's chastised and will of course respect TalkLeft's house rules...he gets carried away sometimes... PPJ, you don't want anything to do with Blaghdaddy's site...and Blaghdaddy's bloggin' for free...no sign-up, you must have gone somewhere else, buddy... Good night all, it's been fun! Sleep safe and we'll do it all again. Blaghdaddy Out.

    Re: Frist and the Republican Myth of a Senate Sta (none / 0) (#47)
    by scarshapedstar on Mon Apr 25, 2005 at 10:22:14 PM EST
    "Lincoln was a Republican, and Republicans are the party that freed the slaves. The Dems were the pro-slavery party." Yes, pro-slavery Democrats like Strom Thurmond. Wait, didn't he die a Republican? Huh... it's almost like something changed in the intervening 160 years after Lincoln's presidency, if you can imagine such a thing! Also, "Remember, [Nixon] is the man who proposed drug treatment rather than incarceration" He sure had a crazy way of doing it. Crazy like a fox! You see, Nixon, in fact, declared on June 17, 1971 that drugs were America's number one enemy, and many scholars mark the start of the war on drugs by this date. Say, didn't he also create the DEA? And he appointed the "drug czars," one of whom, Dr. Jerome Jaffe (no relation, I hope) forced black soldiers who became addicted to heroin in Vietnam to remain in Vietnam for treatment after their tours. He also came up with the brilliant idea of chemically enslaving stateside blacks with methadone. So stick that civil rights in your pipe and smoke it, lefties! Party of Lincoln! Party of Lincoln! Say... who was that Democrat who ran after Nixon... oh yeah, Carter. Hmm, hecampaigned for office in 1976 in favor of legalizing marijuana, or at least softening the laws regarding marijuana, didn't he? Sounds like a real fascist to me. Thankfully we had the Republicans to take down the dangerous drug czars he appointed, such as: Peter Bourne lasted only a couple of years in office as Special Assistant to the President for Health Issues because he was forced to resign on rumors he used drugs himself. His philosophy (like Carter's) was that marijuana is harmless and more a symbol of protest than a crime. He attempted to implement a treatment policy in the drug war, and even claimed cocaine was not that dangerous, but ended up being part of a Mexican initiative to spray Paraquat on crops and a number of other international DEA initiatives. Didn't he know that, in the words of America's first drug czar,Harry Anslinger (fired by JFK): "Most marijuana smokers are Negroes, Hispanics, jazz musicians, and entertainers. Their satanic music is driven by marijuana, and marijuana smoking by white women makes them want to seek sexual relations with Negroes, entertainers, and others. It is a drug that causes insanity, criminality, and death -- the most violence-causing drug in the history of mankind." Yes, the drug war has such laudable origins, doesn't it. So thanks, Doctor Ace, for setting that record straight!

    Re: Frist and the Republican Myth of a Senate Sta (none / 0) (#48)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 26, 2005 at 06:06:39 AM EST
    *yawn* Scar sets up another strawman and knocks it down...so what else is new?

    Re: Frist and the Republican Myth of a Senate Sta (none / 0) (#49)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 26, 2005 at 06:50:23 AM EST
    Posted by: Doctor Ace on April 26, 2005 07:06 AM *yawn* Scar sets up another strawman and knocks it down...so what else is new? *yawn* Another Publican spews hypocritical lies, refuses to consider the possibility that his opinions might lack any credence in the reality-based community, and hijacks a comments thread in order to promote Orwellian doublespeak in the public dialogue. The left talks a good story, Blag, but when you start looking at what they DO rather than what they SAY, you see a few things you maybe didn't know before. I know. I've been there. One might almost consider some of the statements made by this Bush Fellator to be almost within the realm of the real world. Until you remember what you've seen the Publicans do with unfettered power since they subverted the electoral process and stole the last two presidential elections.

    Re: Frist and the Republican Myth of a Senate Sta (none / 0) (#50)
    by wishful on Tue Apr 26, 2005 at 06:50:35 AM EST
    And another thing: let's call it by its name. It is NOT a War on Drugs. It is a war on a particular segment of U.S. citizens, and that is NOT all citizens involved with "illegal" drugs. Citizens of good will must fix this travesty, and move on.

    Re: Frist and the Republican Myth of a Senate Sta (none / 0) (#52)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 26, 2005 at 11:32:24 AM EST
    All you had to do was reference Ann "Adams Apple" Coulter and you just lost the argument. Way to go. BTW I dont need proof, dimwit, the stuff I mentioned above in common knowledge for anyone who doesnt live in a cave.

    Re: Frist and the Republican Myth of a Senate Sta (none / 0) (#51)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 26, 2005 at 12:58:21 PM EST
    Notice how Ace, like most wacko-righties, avoids discussing the verbal beatdown he just received at the hands of scarshapedstar. Hurry up now, Ace, change the subject to straw men and who "won" the election! Or better yet, let's discuss Lincoln some more. After all, we all know that it wasn't any sort of empathy for "the black man's struggle" that led to his position against slavery. It was simply a reason to go to war with the South. Your party has lied about matters of national security to lead us into a war without any end in sight. Over 1,000 dead American men - and your party is also quite resistant to doing anything for either the dead soldiers, the maimed ones, the living ones or the veterans. Your party freely admits that it caters to corporate interests - and while they dont admit this part - it comes at the expense of the middle and lower class. You and your ilk have no defense. You have run this once great country into the ground, and it will take another Democratic president 8 years to fix the mess (which of course your party will somehow manage to take credit for). Have you no shame?

    Re: Frist and the Republican Myth of a Senate Sta (none / 0) (#53)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 26, 2005 at 03:05:21 PM EST
    "BTW I dont need proof..." That says it all, Johnny!

    Frist and the Republican Myth of a Senate Standstill | 52 comments (52 topical)