aps said:The vote was 10-8--right along with party lines.
I am interested to see which democrats will support him when it goes to the full Senate.
Stinger said:And the Democrats prove that they are only interested in one issue, whether or not a woman can kill her baby for whatever reason she chooses and at any time up to the moment of birth. That's the ONLY issue that was of any relivence to them in this matter. It all got down to abortion.
aps said:The vote was 10-8--right along with party lines.
I am interested to see which democrats will support him when it goes to the full Senate.
KCConservative said:My prediction. Drum roll, please:
Bush will get to send up another Supreme Court nominee before his term is over, bringing his total impact on the court to 3 justices.
:2wave:
Navy Pride said:I think your right..One of the liberals is 85, in ill health and will probably retire...........That Judge will swing the courty for sure to the right and there will be one hell of a fight..It should be fun.........
Stinger said:And the Democrats prove that they are only interested in one issue, whether or not a woman can kill her baby for whatever reason she chooses and at any time up to the moment of birth. That's the ONLY issue that was of any relivence to them in this matter. It all got down to abortion.
Navy Pride said:Nelson from Nebraska, maybe Leiberman and Bayh...He will get a little over 60 votes.......
I'm gonna need to see where you got that...not from op-ed pieces or pundits making speculations...Actual words from Senators that say that's the only reason...aps said:So, Stinger, shall we talk about Harriett Myers? Why do you think her own party was so against her nomination? Huh? They went nuts after the president nominated her. Do you think it was because they thought that she wasn't smart enough? Not pretty enough?
Nope. Their problem was that they felt they couldn't count on her overruling Roe v. Wade. There is Bush on the White House lawn assuring them that he knows how she will vote. I could not fathom how the Republicans in Congress didn't believe him. But she had no judicial record showing how she would vote on the abortion issue, so they wanted her out.
So, think again when you claim that only the Dems are solely interested in the abortion issue. NOT SO.
I agree. Abortion is a never-to-be resolved issue, yet everyone has an opinion....even judges. She is allowed to have a personal viewpoint. She was also professional enough to adhere to the rule of law.cnredd said:Why does EVERY justice come down to Roe v. Wade?...Do you realize how lame that is?
cnredd said:But more importantly...
Why does EVERY justice come down to Roe v. Wade?...Do you realize how lame that is?
cnredd said:If that's true, Senator Kennedy will personally drive the corpse to work everyday and declare he's alive a la Weekend at Bernie's until 2009....
aps said:I am interseted to see if Feingold votes for him.
Navy Pride said:Not a chance in hell Feingold will vote for him...He voted against him on the judiciary committee........
aps said:So, Stinger, shall we talk about Harriett Myers? Why do you think her own party was so against her nomination? Huh? They went nuts after the president nominated her. Do you think it was because they thought that she wasn't smart enough? Not pretty enough?
Nope. Their problem was that they felt they couldn't count on her overruling Roe v. Wade.
There is Bush on the White House lawn assuring them that he knows how she will vote.
So, think again when you claim that only the Dems are solely interested in the abortion issue. NOT SO.
aps said:Pat Buchanan said that republicans were outraged because they have been waiting for decades now to get enough people on the Supreme Court to overrule Roe v. Wade and that they could not be assured that Myers would have done that. I'll do the research for this a little later today and post it in this thread.
Stinger said:Here is what Buchannan said on MSNBC
This is not to disparage Harriet Miers. From all accounts, she is a gracious lady who has spent decades in the law and served ably as Bush’s lawyer in Texas and, for a year, as White House counsel.But her qualifications for the Supreme Court are non-existent. She is not a brilliant jurist, indeed, has never been a judge. She is not a scholar of the law. Researchers are hard-pressed to dig up an opinion. She has not had a brilliant career in politics, the academy, the corporate world or public forum. Were she not a friend of Bush, and female, she would never have even been considered.
getCSS("3088867")
What commended her to the White House, in the phrase of the hour, is that she “has no paper trail.” So far as one can see, this is Harriet Miers’ principal qualification for the U.S. Supreme Court.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8789892
In the entire statement not one word on abortion.
But for the Dems who say out one side of thier mouths that abortion is not thier only issue it IS the only issue with regard to Alito, In others words they will never vote for a Supreme Court Justice unless he/she pledges, not matter what legal case is brought before them, they will not vote to overturn RoevWade.
aps said:Why did I think that Feingold was NOT on that committee? Okay, then he's voting aginst Alito. I'll have to read his reasons. He had supported Roberts.
Navy Pride said:Roberts replaced Renquist.......A Conservative replacing a Conservative......Alito is replacing a moderate..............
I am beginning to believe the only dem who will vote for Alito is Nelson.........He is between a rock and a hard place because he is from a very Conservative state and there is a congressman by the name of Tom Osborne who is the EX Coach of the Nebraska Cornhuskers and is one of the most popular men in the state....Oh and he is a Conservative.....
I think it is clear that Alito will get the 51 votes for confirmation,,,,,,,,,I am watching CSPAN now and he already has 49..............The only thing that can slow him down is a filibuster and if the dems do that the leader will invoke the Constitutional option..................
aps said:The Dems have stated that they won't do a filibuster. While you might not consider them to be credible, I think they will stand by their decision NOT to filibuster. Finally, they make a smart decision. *sigh*
Navy Pride said:Did you know that the 2 liberal judges that Clinton nominated got 96 and 89 votes?.........Many Conservative republicans said they disagreed with her on almost every issue but they felt it was the presidents right to have people of his political persuasion on the SCOTUS...........
I wonder why it does not work the same way when a republican is president?
aps said:Yes, I am aware of Ginsburg and Breyers positive votes. However, I must point out that Clinton went to Hatch and asked him for names of people that the republicans could confirm. Ginsburg and Breyer's names were on the list. Thus, Clinton received approval from the chairman of the judiciary committee prior to the nomination. Thus, their high number of positive votes is not surprising.
Regardless, I totally agree with you regarding Bush's nominations. I think the Democrats' problem is that they had been so used to running the Senate that they forget how to behave appropriately. I think this is nothing but a tantrum on their part because they are not in control and cannot grasp the fact that Bush should be entitled to nominate judges who support his line of thinking.