Specter hopes Justice Stevens doesn't quit in 2010

[onehandle]

Source: AP

Sen. Arlen Specter, D-Pa., worries that a nomination fight this year would mean gridlock in the partisan Senate. Specter thinks there's a better chance for consensus next year.

Specter tells "Fox News Sunday" he hopes Obama would pick someone who would be a check on executive power, as he says Stevens has provided.

Arizona Sen. Jon Kyl, the second-ranking Republican in the Senate, isn't ruling out a possible GOP filibuster.

Read more: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100404/ap_on_go_su_co/us_supreme_court_stevens

---

Well, nothing is going to bring consensus with these racist Republicans. My reason for Stevens to clam up for now is that a retirement would just sent that many more right-wingers to the polls this Fall.

And who the fuck is Kyl proposing to filibuster? No nominee yet, you ass.

[Ian David]

1. Spooky Arlen is just being a douchebag again. n/t

[jwirr]

9. I do not think so - many repugs have voted that way merely to be

able to control the SCOTUS. A show of a good fight before 2012 could bring them back. Not to mention that if he quits now all the time we are trying to get someone to take his place leaves a decided majority of conservatives holding down the court or at the very least a tie on all too many issues.

[BlueIris]

10. Agreed. nt

[MiniMe]

20. I think he is right

It would be very hard to get a nomination through during an election year. It won't be much easier this year, but I think it would happen. Remember, Stevens was nominated by Ford. And Arlen has been a pretty reliable dem vote so far. At the beginning, I think that it was hard to break the habits, but there was never a question about how he would vote on health care, unlike Lincoln, Nelson, Landreau, and Lieberman. Lincoln and Nelson could be hard votes to get this year, but I don't think that Specter would be.

[babylonsister]

2. He's just worried about his own behind and election. Ignore him. nt

[Botany]

11. Egg zack lee

he doesn't want to go on the record about anything

[Kolesar]

13. Nailed! eom

[yourout]

3. "nomination fight this year would mean gridlock in the partisan Senate...."

And that would be different how?

[SharonAnn]

5. Or make his re-election more difficult? Methinks that's the real reason.

It would get all kinds of extremists riled up and he might get voted out!

[Bette Noir]

4. Who gave Specter a microphone?

[UpInArms]

6. "Fox News Sunday" n/t

[zbdent]

7. Is Spectre secretly hoping that the Repugs will get back into the

majority, so he can end the charade, and return to the fold?

[AlbertCat]

8. proposing to filibuster? No nominee yet, you ass.

Obama could choose Buddha and they would filibuster."Too radical!" "too asian"

Is the GOP about NOT doing things or what?

[iamjoy]

12. Sotomayor Was A Bad Choice Last Year

I thought this last year when Sotomayor was nominated. Politically speaking, it was a bad move to nominate her last year. In 2009, President Obama was in his honeymoon stage - he could have put in a true liberal who would provide real balance to the likes of Scalia and Thomas. Sotomayor should have been the one to nominate this year. The Republicans wouldn't dare filibuster the first Hispanic nominee if it was an election year. Now, Obama's luster has faded a bit and the Republicans are bitter over losing the healthcare vote, so they're spoiling for a fight just to look relevant.

Or it may not have hurt had Justice Stevens retired last year.

Of course, I am speaking of political strategy without any consideration as to qualifications.

[ladywnch]

14. I was thinking the same thing. he hasn't even retired yet let alone

picking a nominee and they're talking filibuster. No these bastards are too obstructionist.... no not at all.


They've just basically Obama a freebee. They've said they plan to filibuster so no matter who he puts up they'll filibuster so nominate someone moderate and let them shoot them down on principle. Then put a flaming liberal up and force it through. These assclowns will never learn.

[mvd]

15. We should say Nuclear Option if they try to filibuster

After all, it's what the Repukes wanted after Dem filibuster threats of judicial nominees.

[blue_onyx]

18. But...

Obama is a moderate. I expect him to nominate mostly moderate judges.

I agree about nominating Sotomayor last year. Obama has spoken about possibly nominating someone who has not been a judge. It's more controversial to nominate a person who has no judicial record and it would probably be difficult to get approval from the senate. If Obama wanted to make a non-traditional pick, he should have done it last year.

[Zynx]

19. Sotomayor appears to be fairly left-wing.

She is actually opposed to corporate personhood, which is generally seen as somewhat of a fringe position of the left.

[havocmom]

16. Tickled pink that Kyl already announced filibuster without a nominee!

Every time a GOP pol or pundit accuses ANY DEM of being partisan, just roll that beautiful video of Kyl mouthing off and pose the obvious question:

"So, since no nominee had been announced, the ONLY reason Kyl had for announcing any nominee would be filibustered would be because nomination made by a DEM POTUS and heading to a DEM Senate for confirmation. Isn't that partisan politics at its most blatant?"

[24601]

23. He didn't announce/promise/etc a filibuster, the article said that

Kyl wouldn't rule one out.

I tend to believe, however, that 59 Senators equals a better confirmation chance than 53 or 54.

[S_B_Jackson]

17. Who gives a crap what Specter wants?

A DINO turn-coat who jumped to the Republicans when he saw they were in going to be in power, and when it was clear that Rethuglicans had had enough of his nonsense, he just jumps back to being a Democrat and we're just supposed to accept this warmed over retread?

As for the asshat Kyl, as you point out there's no nominee, why asked if he intends to filibuster? Would you expect one of our Senators to rule out a possible legitimate course of action prior to it even coming up as a consideration?

[neverforget]

21. Maybe those darn Republicans will be nicer to Democrats next year!

If we cave to them some more, they'll like us more. :sarcasm:

[Hawaii Hiker]

22. What is going to change in 2011, other than we might lose seats in the senate

Senator Specter can't honestly believe there is all of a sudden going to be unity next year....In the immortal words of John Macenroe "You cannot be serious"...

I need an orange bang head - :banghead: :banghead: :banghead:

[lsewpershad]

24. Can't wait

to get rid of this piece of shit.

[David__77]

25. There's no filibuster for the supreme court nominees.

If there was, then there'd be no Clarence Thomas today. I think a nomination fight would be an excellent base-mobilizer THIS year.

[USA_1]

26. Agree 100%

[Old Troop]

27. Spector is a POS

I think his reasoning is that he may have to defend the President's nominee while running again this autumn. You know that he'd rather have others do the hard work.