26-04-2005 10:57									#1
	Perfect crystallization of what's wrong with the Democrats Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

Just opened WashingtonPost.com for my lunchtime fix of US news, and there, at the very center of my screen, was this headline:

quote: Poll: Americans Oppose Rule Change in Senate Two-thirds reject GOP plan to ease confirmation of Bush judicial nominees. Survey also finds president's approval ratings falling. – Richard Morin and Dan Balz • Democrats Hint at Filibuster Deal

That's it in a nutshell: the GOP has made a very big, very public push for "reforms" that turn out to be overwhelmingly unpopular, and what do the Dems do? Race to teh barricades? Move in for the kill? Reposition themselves as America's true centrists?

No. They begin looking to cut a deal.

Feckless losers. An entire party of feckless losers, and I'm a member.

	26-04-2005 11:10									#2
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

Actually, those poll results show the success the Democrats have had in framing the debate on the filibuster of judicial nominees. Polls show that a majority of people oppose the filibuster of judicial nominees, but the Democrats have managed to spin the Republican move to change the Senate rules to end such filibusters into "an attack on checks and balances" and other such nonsense. That they've managed to turn 2/3rds of Americans against reforms that would restrict a practice a majority of Americans don't approve of speaks well of the Democratic party.

You can't stick to your guns on a foundation consisting mostly of spin, however. Best to use the temporary advantage you've built up to cut a favorable deal, which the Democrats seem to be going for. Smart move.

	26-04-2005 11:39									#3
	Increase the size of your Attachments

The Democrats are actually playing this very smart. What they have offered is to confirm two of the judges in exchange for GOP agreement to allow the filibuster to continue.

If the GOP agrees, then they get two appelate court justices but give up the right to filibuster for the rest, which will allow the Democrats to filibuster Supreme Court justices with impunity. This would outrage the GOP base particularly among the religious right which supports stopping the filibuster.

If the GOP does not agree to this deal, then the Democrats can claim that they tried to be reasonable and compromise, but the extremist unreasonable GOP refused to compromise at all. That would hurt the GOP among centrists.

Very smart move by the democrats.

	26-04-2005 12:00									#4
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

Recently Reid has been smacking around the Republicans like red-headed step children. First the Social Security debacle, then the Republicans make fools of themselves in the Shiavo mess, then Bolton looks like he'd going to be blocked and now it looks like the Dems'll get this too.

Damn, losing Daschle was the best thing that ever happened to the Democrats.

	26-04-2005 12:03									#5
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

Or ten years of being *****-slapped into being the minority party. A diet of a little crow is sometimes good for the soul, if not the stomach.

On the flip side, a lot of the Republican leadership has gotten a bit arrogant and complacent of late.

	26-04-2005 12:10									#6
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: Feckless losers. An entire party of feckless losers, and I'm a member.

Permission to use that in my sig?

	26-04-2005 12:24									#7
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

I'm not seeing how the foundation is made mostly on spin. Bush got 95% of his nominees through and it is only that last 5% of dire hard extremist candidates who are being filibustered. In Clinton's first term something like 20% of his nominees got filibustered by the Republicans and Newt was up on TV talking about how the filibuster was as American as apple pie and was part of the checks and balances.

The flip flopping of the Republican party would be comical if they weren't attacking the democratic nature of our government.

	26-04-2005 12:27									#8
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

quote: Originally posted by Boshko Recently Reid has been smacking around the Republicans like red-headed step children. First the Social Security debacle, then the Republicans make fools of themselves in the Shiavo mess, then Bolton looks like he'd going to be blocked and now it looks like the Dems'll get this too. Damn, losing Daschle was the best thing that ever happened to the Democrats.

Can't disagree about Daschle, but it's hard to see how any of the rest has anything to do with the Dems; it's just the Dems benefitting from GOP arrogant overreaching. And that's the problem: the Dems have been coasting for years without standing for anything other than not being Republicans. It's not a winning strategy.

	26-04-2005 12:28									#9
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

quote: Originally posted by Boshko Recently Reid has been smacking around the Republicans like red-headed step children. First the Social Security debacle, then the Republicans make fools of themselves in the Shiavo mess, then Bolton looks like he'd going to be blocked and now it looks like the Dems'll get this too. Damn, losing Daschle was the best thing that ever happened to the Democrats.

Yeah, Daschle was a do nothing who had run out of ideas. We needed new blood who was hungry for the kill.

Now if we need to hammer home how corrupt Tom Delay is and how the whole Republican Party in Congress knew it but didn't care as long as Delay kept the dirty money flowing in then we'd really draw some blood.

	26-04-2005 12:48									#10
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

Joshua Mitchell of www.talkingpointmemo.com take on this:

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/ar...4_24.php#005523

He's a smart man and I usually trust his judgement, its at least worth reading.

	26-04-2005 12:52									#11
	Got spare money?

You're surprised? Neither party gives a stuff about the little people or the voters, who have proved their own stupidity again and again.

	26-04-2005 13:01									#12
	Inflate your Upload Space

quote: In Clinton's first term something like 20% of his nominees got filibustered by the Republicans

Facts are your friend, Oerdin...

quote: Joshua Mitchell of www.talkingpointmemo.com take on this:

How can you forget the name of Joshua Micah Marshall, especially given how prominently it's displayed on TPM?

	26-04-2005 14:00									#13
	Increase the size of your Attachments

quote: Originally posted by Oerdin I'm not seeing how the foundation is made mostly on spin. Bush got 95% of his nominees through and it is only that last 5% of dire hard extremist candidates who are being filibustered. In Clinton's first term something like 20% of his nominees got filibustered by the Republicans and Newt was up on TV talking about how the filibuster was as American as apple pie and was part of the checks and balances. The flip flopping of the Republican party would be comical if they weren't attacking the democratic nature of our government.

Actually the Repubs didn't to my knowledge filibuster anyone, they didn't need to as they were the majority party and could stall the nominations in committee or simply vote them down. The filibuster is different because it is being used by the minority to quash appointments against the will of the majority.

	26-04-2005 15:45									#14
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

Agreed with Shi here.

It's a bright move. Short term pain for long term gain.

	26-04-2005 15:47									#15
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

quote: Bush got 95% of his nominees through and it is only that last 5% of dire hard extremist candidates who are being filibustered.

So a extremist is someone who opposes Roe?

That's a novel definition.

	26-04-2005 15:50									#16
	Got spare money?

quote: Originally posted by Drake Tungsten quote: In Clinton's first term something like 20% of his nominees got filibustered by the Republicans Facts are your friend, Oerdin... quote: Joshua Mitchell of www.talkingpointmemo.com take on this: How can you forget the name of Joshua Micah Marshall, especially given how prominently it's displayed on TPM?

The man deserves it

	26-04-2005 15:53									#17
	Increase Your PM Length

Oooooh oooooh archival footage of the GOP filibustering a judicial nominee!

http://www.crooksandliars.com/2005/04/25.html#a2629 (scroll down a bit)

	26-04-2005 16:38									#18
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

quote: The man deserves it

I agree. Any man pretentious enough to use his middle name of "Micah" in everyday life deserves to have his name forgotten.

quote: Oooooh oooooh archival footage of the GOP filibustering a judicial nominee!

I wouldn't have such a problem with the Democrats filibustering judicial nominees if they did it the manly way, holding the floor for hours like in 1968. The ***** new-style filibuster they're using today can burn in hell, though.

	26-04-2005 16:43									#19
	Tired of ads?

quote: I wouldn't have such a problem with the Democrats filibustering judicial nominees if they did it the manly way, holding the floor for hours like in 1968. The ***** new-style filibuster they're using today can burn in hell, though.

Yep. Even their filibusters are limp wristed.

	26-04-2005 17:16									#20
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by Ben Kenobi So a extremist is someone who opposes Roe? That's a novel definition.

Appelate justices have what to do with Roe v. Wade?

	26-04-2005 17:18									#21
	Increase the size of your Attachments

You tell me.

It seems that this is the litmus test that determines whether or not the Dems will filibuster a nominee.

	26-04-2005 17:18									#22
	Full PM-box? Change here!

Those videos were cool, BTW. I never knew Roger Mudd used to work for CBS. Was also crazy seeing a 70-year old Strom Thurmond...

	26-04-2005 17:21									#23
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by Ben Kenobi You tell me. It seems that this is the litmus test that determines whether or not the Dems will filibuster a nominee.

Then you would be wrong. Apellate court justices can't overturn Roe v. Wade so it would make absolutely no sense for that to be a litmus test for appointing them.

	26-04-2005 17:23									#24
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

Who said the dems litmus policy made sense?

	26-04-2005 17:25									#25
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

quote: Originally posted by Ben Kenobi Who said the dems litmus policy made sense?

Are you dense? Having someone's opinion on Roe v. Wade make a difference as regards to appellate justice appointments makes as much sense as having foreign policy opinions be your litmus test for voting for governors, it just doesn't apply at all.

Do you have any proof for your bizarre assertions?

	26-04-2005 17:27									#26
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

Perhaps that's a good litmus, because it also applies to their positions on other issues.

R v wade isn't the only issue that it up for debate, there are cases up and down the court system involving this issue.

The reason I say that it is a litmus, is because the nominees all seem to be prolife judges, while I don't see them filibustering pro abortion ones.

	26-04-2005 18:14									#27
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Can someone explain to me why we don't force the people engaging in fillibusters to actually stand at the podium and talk until they drop? The soft filibuster currently used is way too damn powerful and annoying.

	26-04-2005 18:30									#28
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

quote: Majority Leader Senator Mike Mansfield (D-Montana), spearheaded the adoption of a new Senatorial procedure. Mansfield created a system that would technically maintain the Senate's tradition of unlimited debate but would prevent a legislative logjam. This system is known as the "two-track" system. In this system, if one issue or "track" is being filibustered, the Senate can switch to another track in order to deal with other pending business. Even this did not stop Southern Senators from filibustering the civil rights legislation in 1964. However, the majority realized they had a super-majority to invoke cloture and were determined to pass the legislation. These Senators, therefore, did not use the "two-track" system. The Southern Senators held out for fifty-seven working days, including six Saturdays, before cloture was invoked and the bill was passed nine days later Since the 1960s the "two-track" system devised by Mansfield has prevailed, preventing old-fashioned filibusters. As John W. Dean, President Richard Nixon's former White House counsel, has written: "On the one hand, the two-track system strengthened the ability of the majority to withstand a filibuster by enabling it to conduct other business. On the other hand, it made it easier for the filibustering minority, which did not have to constantly hold the floor." The "two-track" system appears to have changed the culture of the Senate and seems more suited to the age of soundbites and a heavy legislative workload. When there are filibusters, they are usually scheduled so that other Senate business isn't delayed. Usually, however, if a filibuster is threatened, the leadership won't even attempt to bring the issue to the floor unless it is sure it has the support of at least sixty Senators (three-fifths). In essence, the filibuster has changed from a noisy propeller airplane to a silent Stealth Bomber. The merits of the modern filibuster can be debated endlessly, but it continues to play its historical role in the Senate in giving extra power to the minority, especially nowadays in a closely divided Senate, which needs a super-majority for highly contentious matters.

http://www.hnn.us/articles/1818.html

	26-04-2005 19:42									#29
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by DinoDoc Can someone explain to me why we don't force the people engaging in fillibusters to actually stand at the podium and talk until they drop? The soft filibuster currently used is way too damn powerful and annoying.

That's a very good question.

	26-04-2005 19:45									#30
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by DinoDoc Can someone explain to me why we don't force the people engaging in fillibusters to actually stand at the podium and talk until they drop? The soft filibuster currently used is way too damn powerful and annoying.

Because people nowadays are wimps.