home

The Compromise Senators: A Bad Sign

By Jeralyn, Section Judiciary
Posted on Wed May 18, 2005 at 12:28:52 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

Who's working behind the scenes for a compromise?

Democratic Sen. Ken Salazar of Colorado had attended at least 13 private meetings over the previous 24 hours with senators trying to craft a deal, a spokesman said.

Graham and Salazar, along with Sens. Ben Nelson, D-Neb., John McCain, R-Ariz., Mark Pryor, D-Ark., and others, were working to try and find six Republicans and six Democrats to block Frist from banning judicial filibusters and block Reid from filibustering all of Bush's controversial judicial nominees.

I don't want to see this happen. My source tells me they are talking about agreeing to allow up or down votes on all but two of the nominees and that Janice Rogers Brown would no longer be blocked. I am calling Sen. Salazar's office right to protest this compromise.

Frist does not have 51 votes, even with Cheney. The Dems should hang on and fight.

Update: I just got through and left a voicemail at Senator Salzar's office. If you are from Colorado, the number is (202) 224-5852. It was easy. Call your Senator, you can find your Senator's number here.

< Conference Call With Sen. Schumer | Mr. Galloway Goes to Washington >

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

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    The Compromise Senators: A Bad Sign | 15 comments (15 topical)
    Re: The Compromise Senators: A Bad Sign (none / 0) (#7)
    by glanton on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 12:58:36 PM EST
    Once again Jim makes a caricature of his claim that he isn't a Republican. Right, and neither is John O'Neil. Anyway, back in reality: Prissy, Janny and crew represent that which is most depraved in the American soul. That they have at least 55 Senators eagerly waiting to rubberstamp them is sickening. The regular fascistic sentimental references to Janny B. as the daughter of a sharecropper would be even worse, were it not so funny that it's on CSPAN2 and for the most part nobody even knows what's happening. Just like Reagan's funeral and Shiavo's lemonade standers, right Jim? What's ugliest of all, though, is forwarding the pretense that this isn't all foregone, the ole "let's just have a vote and see what happens" gag.

    Re: The Compromise Senators: A Bad Sign (none / 0) (#8)
    by ppjakajim on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 12:58:58 PM EST
    glanton - You don't need to be a Repub to have a smidgen of common sense. As to your Sharecropper remark, please be so kind as to remember than I am the son of one. Guess we'uns is gettin plum uppity. Pardon me while I go look for that wall for a redneck mother to get up against....

    Re: The Compromise Senators: A Bad Sign (none / 0) (#9)
    by glanton on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 12:59:01 PM EST
    Uh, re the sharecropper claptrap, oh challenged one, the point is this: Who cares? How does that make up for Janny's outright contempt for the very liberties she is sworn to uphold? I have yet to see any common sense from the GOP block on the issue of judges. What I have seen is that block (of which you have adeptly shown yourself a prime member) doing a helluva lot of damage to the country. Anyway, where is bejeebus's name is the media on this? Can we please get some network coverage of what's happening in the Senate right now??? Is it really too much to ask? We can all watch a braindead woman reflexively follow the movement of a balloon until the image is grafted into us, but we can't get some real light shone on this very real issue?

    Re: The Compromise Senators: A Bad Sign (none / 0) (#6)
    by ppjakajim on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 12:59:09 PM EST
    et al - Me too. Let's have a vote. Fight to the death. mfox - Uh, that's 52%. And it is "chickens come home to roost." Other than that, the world goes on its merry way. Our country will have mid terms in about 17 months, with the next biggie in about 39 months. So let us see what happens. The Left has been wrong for years and years. Perhaps they'll get one right this time. Somehow though, I doubt it. aw - What you fail to understand that what we have here is a constitutional republic, not a "democracy." Not that you cared as long as you were in power, but the facts are the facts.

    Re: The Compromise Senators: A Bad Sign (none / 0) (#1)
    by DawesFred60 on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 12:59:12 PM EST
    Can we say back room deals being made against you?...but it was the land of freedom right? just because the cops have not started the mass round-up's has nothing to do with bush right? the filibustering ideals are dead you just don't know it yet. what will come next, you don't want to know.

    Re: The Compromise Senators: A Bad Sign (none / 0) (#2)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 12:59:12 PM EST
    The Dems should hang on and fight. When was the last time they did that on any issue of consequence? I'll believe in a backbone (or a showing of principles somewhere leftward of Newt Gingrich) when I see it.

    Re: The Compromise Senators: A Bad Sign (none / 0) (#3)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 12:59:12 PM EST
    Ya know - I've really really had it with this a**hole we elected. He showed up, spewed a bunch of BS propoganda and half of us slurped it up like Jim Jones' Koolaid. He has now played fast and loose with power to the point where it will take the rest of my life and longer to fix the moral and financial morasse that he and his theocrats have left us. For those of you who supported him - and to those of you who still do, George W. Bush doesn't give a flying f*ck about you, your family, your future, your job, this country or the lives of the kids he's sending untrained and undeequipped into urban freakin combat for Chrissake. He doesn't. The emperor has no damn clothes and you enabling him to perpetuate his misdeeds WITH IMPUNITY is, I now will come out and say NO DIFFERENT from the people in Totalitarian societies who justify, who hide in their houses and wave whatever flag the guy in the uniform gives them. Well just like it was no excuse for Charles Grainer, Lyndie England or Ms. Harmen, going along to get along, there is no excuse for not demanding truth, accountability and integrity from our leaders - FOR NOT THINKING OF THE CONSEQUENCES OF THEIR ACTIONS. If you're on the board of directors of a Fortune 500 company, or believe that the bible should be the primary code of law and source of education in this country - or perhaps if you're a contractor working for Haliburton and wants to see the world, then Bush is your guy. But the hens will come home to roost for you too, as the economy tanks and the dollar dives under the weight of our debt. Just like for Soldiers, there are a lot of benefits to be hade as an American in Iraq... if you live. If you're not a member of this not very big group, then stop immediately and demand that whichever party you belong to DO something to reign in this disaster of a president before everything our grandparents worked for and a hundred years of progress is wiped out. I promise you all this. If the Republicans eliminate the filibuster, there will be a reaction so huge that Frist et al will wish they'd never even heard the word. I will consider efforts to find common ground futile and it will be all out war. Screw the higher ground. We will come for them and beat them at their own game and I will be leading the charge. At this point you are either with Bush or against him. I don't see any middle ground. Remember, your patriotic duty is to protect the COUNTRY, not it's current leader. So think carefully.

    Re: The Compromise Senators: A Bad Sign (none / 0) (#4)
    by aw on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 12:59:12 PM EST
    We are in agreement mfox. Plus there are more of us population-wise represented by the senate minority. What can they be thinking? That we'll all docilely walk up to the guillotine and put our heads in? Uh-uh. Hell no.

    Re: The Compromise Senators: A Bad Sign (none / 0) (#5)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 12:59:12 PM EST
    This is one of those moments we will all remember for a long time, one way or another. I'm very proud of the Democratic Senators speaking right now. Reid & Leahy have been fantastic. Arlen Specter spoke reasonably as well. "The President rejects our advice but demands our consent" - Sen. Patrick Leahy

    Re: The Compromise Senators: A Bad Sign (none / 0) (#10)
    by BigTex on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 12:59:12 PM EST
    mfox - problem with tour analysis is that most (a plurality) people see the democrats as well as the republicans as abusing their power. The repubs abusing the power with the nominees, and the dems abusing their power with the filibuster. Now that the dems have shut down the Senate they lose what little gains they stood to make, it's purely a power struggle now. This issue points out two distinct points. 1) Hypocracy runs so deep on both sides that no one really cares. This is just like Clinton's Presidency with the Democrat majority in the Senate, only with the roles reversed. Both sides are being hypocritical to the point of absurdity. 2) This issue is a good example of why President Bush is President and not Kerry. The Democrats ahd a golden opportunity to gain public syhmpathy. But rather than gain the public sympathy, they have gone and squandered the possibility by shutting down the government. If the Demos had gone to the podium and said "Mr. Speaker, while we maintain our disagreement with the nomination, for the sake of the country we will allow an up or down vote on all the nominees" they would have come out smelling like roses. Wasted opportunities are what is keeping the demos out of power right now. Republicans have lost the edge they had in campaigning. They are not as finely honed because they have had successes. Turning public opinion against Republicans isn't the right tack to take, turning public opinion in their favor is the better choice of action. This was a golden opportunity they had and lost.

    Re: The Compromise Senators: A Bad Sign (none / 0) (#11)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 12:59:12 PM EST
    Parallel, I would argue that it is in the country's best interest for lifetime appointments to be representative of the majority of Americans. That would mean that their political views fall w/in the 60% group of folks between the 20% extremists on either side. Therefore, regardless of the tactics used, the President has a duty to nominate judges who can be approved by at least 60% of the Senate. Now if you're saying that the Dems are being snarky and unreasonable about mainstream judges I think that the facts scream out to differ in this case. These judges are extremely right wing. I would expect if Clinton had nominated Ted Kennedy (for lack of a more approp. example) for a seat on this bench all hell would have broken loose in the house and Senate. So all this academic discussion about the history of the filibuster, etc. is irrelevant to the fact that extreme right wing judges are being nominated and justified by the "mandate" of having one extra vote in the Senate. I agree that Dems have had issues with integrity and stagnation and was very disillusioned with the Dems for a long time. However, I am uniting to fight the onslaught of devolution that is spreading through our legislative and judicial systems like wildfire. What I believe in is the democratic ideals of opportunity for everyone and a safety net for citizens who, despite their best efforts can't make ends meet. A rich country such as ours should not have hungry, illiterate people, massive incarceration and wars that benefit the few and exploit the many. A country where you can get a Decaf Mocha Latte within walking distance in at least three directions! : )

    Re: The Compromise Senators: A Bad Sign (none / 0) (#12)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 12:59:12 PM EST
    Can we please get some network coverage of what's happening in the Senate right now??? Corporatist Executive management: "Sorry, no can do. Everything going on is just dull procedure, it doesn't sell." I'm sure that we'll hear something about the "Democratic" and "Liberal" whining once it is over. Now THAT sells. All of that is assuming that their decisions aren't motivated by outright bias, something I'm not totally convinced of for every media organization.

    Re: The Compromise Senators: A Bad Sign (none / 0) (#13)
    by pigwiggle on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 12:59:12 PM EST
    "Can we please get some network coverage of what's happening in the Senate right now???" Well, it's not network but it is free.

    Re: The Compromise Senators: A Bad Sign (none / 0) (#14)
    by kdog on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 12:59:13 PM EST
    Network coverage?...Please. Only if the runaway bride showed up.

    Re: The Compromise Senators: A Bad Sign (none / 0) (#15)
    by aw on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 12:59:14 PM EST
    PPJ: Republic or democracy, when all hell breaks loose, there will be more of us in the blue states. When majority rule becomes the only rule, we will be that majority.

    The Compromise Senators: A Bad Sign | 15 comments (15 topical)