Did you HEAR what they're saying about Roberts' chances??????

[Stinky The Clown]

Actually, they're not saying very much .... except to play 'inside baseball' about how the Dems will be fighting this nomination tooth and nail ......... because that is exactly what they want. A good cock fight. Feathers flying. To the death. Claws into flesh.

Anything to distract from the steady flow of bad news that is all against the REPUGS.

Anything to distract from Treason in the White House®.

Anything to distract from 1776 deaths and counting.

Anything to distract from the entire War in Iraq®.

Anything to distract from the Downing Street Minutes®.

Anything to distract from the Ohio coin dealer/bribery/voting scandal trial.

Anything to distract from Delay/Abramoff.

Anything to distract from the endless spew of garbage coming from the besieged and captured People's White House.

And so the RW owned 'Liberal Media®' is talking about a nasty, partisan Senate fight. And what are they dragging out as quotes? Kennedy's comments ..... on Robert Bork! There will be a whole hiring blitz for interns to research other Dem 'Borkisms' and 'Slappyisms' and 'Fat Tony-isms'. They are SOOOOOOOO wanting a fight, they're creating one from whole cloth and thin air.

A surf across the cable dial this evening between the hours of 9.10 PM and 11 PM EDT was quite enlightening. All the talk was of 'the battle for confirmation'.

DO NOT GIVE THIS TO THEM

Urge our people to vote 'no' as a block and let it go. It is the best we can hope for. The media blather, just tonight, gives truth to an earlier posit of mine ......

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x1941224

[The Jacobin]

1. Thirty Years

Roberts will be on the court for THIRTY YEARS at a minimum. He fundamentally changes the balance of the court. Look for the post pointing out Kerry's reaction to the nomination.

Keep up the pressure on Rove and Shrub and all those scum. Get them convicted and jailed. But don't lose sight of the bigger picture.

THIRTY YEARS of a right-wing swing vote is a very long time.

Long enough to make Karl look like kids stuff.

[Sparkly]

2. Um... We already had this discussion elsewhere, Jacobin.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x1941283#1941542

Again, we all know how serious it is. But there will be another in Chimp's term, and possible a third. It's a terrible loss, but we can't lose the option to filibuster over this one.

[kevsand]

3. Sorry, Sparkly,

but I think if we forego the filibuster now, we never get to use it on any subsequent nominees with any credibility.

Of course, as you point out, people are all over the board tonight on this one:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x4141317

and

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x4142215

[Sparkly]

5. Huh?

If Democrats USE the filibuster now, and Repugs pull the "nuclear option" (changing the rules to disallow the use of filibuster for judicial nominees) then Democrats can't use it on subsequent nominees at ALL. PERIOD. Let alone "credibility" -- it's GONE.

Meanwhile, the result is that Roberts, or someone far worse, gets in to replace O'Connor; ANYbody Chimpy likes gets in to replace Rehnquist (use your imagination); Fat Tony gets to be Chief Justice; and if Stevens resigns (he's 85 years old!) they get yet ANOTHER shoo-in.

See what I'm saying?

[Kazak]

6. I don't think they have the votes for the Nuclear Option.

Dems just need to unflinchingly filibuster this nom and let the Nuclear Option flub. Then they're done for.

[kevsand]

7. That's what we have to keep in mind.

If they had the votes for the nuclear option, they would have used it earlier. The public is on our side on this. Why throw away a fight we can win?

[Sparkly]

8. They didn't have to use it earlier, because they got their nominees.

The Senate is 55-44. They only need 49 + Cheney to change the rules, as I understand it. These Republicans are unbelievably attached to BushCo (Nixon would *wish* he'd had it this good). They could get their 49 easily.

[kevsand]

10. That's not how the timing worked.

They waited and waited and waited to pull the trigger, because they didn't have the votes, and the polls showed the public was against it. The gang of 14 was able to come together because there was a stalemate.

They won't have the votes now, either. The majority of the public doesn't want Roe overturned, and they won't support Roberts. The Dems will be heroes for blocking him.

[Sparkly]

11. No, they didn't have the votes to stop a filibuster.

They did have the votes to confirm justices, and they did so. But the stalemate was about the filibuster.

They DO have the votes to change the rules, and they have the votes to confirm anybody they want to if they do that. I agree the majority don't want Roe overturned, but too many are only vaguely aware of what's going on.

[kevsand]

12. Again, my apologies, but that's not how it happened.

You're right that they didn't have the votes to stop the filibuster. That's why they proposed changing the rules, i.e., the nuclear option, and they kept saying "We're going to do this tomorrow, or later this week, or real soon now," and they never did, because they didn't have the votes for that, either. Too many Repubs like McCain and others publicly said they wouldn't support it.

It dragged out for weeks and weeks and months, and they didn't pull the trigger because they didn't have even the 49 votes for that. So they couldn't end the filibuster either directly or indirectly. If Frist had the votes he would have used them. A number of people admitted anonymously to the media that he didn't, and couldn't.

They always had, and still have, the votes to confirm, but not to end the filibuster, and not to use the nuclear option.

Not to change the subject, but I'm going to be very interested in what the General thinks of this. He was very vocal in his opposition to Gonzalez as AG, for example. Will he say anything, do you think?

[tritsofme]

15. Warner, Graham, and DeWine all have said they would go nuclear

(all of whom were in the "Gang of 14") if the Democrats filibuster when circumstances weren't "extraordinary" (ie never)

That gives them 51 votes for the nuclear option.

[kevsand]

16. Which Repubs do you have listed as not supporting the nuke option?

I think there's more than four. There were last time.

[tritsofme]

18. Collins, Chaffee, and Snowe are the only ones that have unequivocally

come out against the nuclear option.

In recent days even McCain has been on the fence.

All the GOP needs to do is pick off 2 members of the "Gang of 14" to get to 50 and Cheney can break the tie.

[kevsand]

19. If that's true,

then we've already lost the filibuster, and it doesn't matter if we try it now or wait to try it later. What is the point of waiting to use something that won't work anyway? Or worse, never use it because "we need to pick the right moment." If they can and will nuke it, there is no right moment.

I say call their bluff and use it now, when the public is on our side. Put up or shut up time. We make them the bad guys for changing the rules to put in a guy the public doesn't really want.

It's late. I'm tired of thinking about this. Explain it to me again tomorrow...

[tritsofme]

20. Put up or shutup time was two months ago.

People don't pay much attention to circuit court nominees, and in May the nuclear option made Republicans look like spoiled children who wanted to get their own way 100% of the time.

Now with SCOTUS nominees the public will probably see his confirmation as more urgent, and the nuclear option will look more reasonable.

We should have forced their hand in May, now they are in a better position to go nuclear.

[kevsand]

21. I think we have the gang of 14 to thank for that.

I didn't like it at the time, and I think I like it even less now.

[The Jacobin]

4. You're right.

And its getting late.

There will be plenty of time to hash this out over the next month.

Good night, all.

[Dr Fate]

9. I hope we dont take the bait. As far as I'm concerned, Bush nominated Rove

n/t

[opihimoimoi]

13. More Bad News from Bush...he just don let up does he???

[McCamy Taylor]

14. Is this satire? This nominee is a gold mine for the Dems if they mine him.

Americans support abortion rights for adults. If these rights are threatened a whole bunch of Democrats who have not been very politically involved are suddenly going to get mobilized before the 2006 election.

The Dems need to start painting this guy as the biggest threat to Roe V. Wade this side of the Vatican.

A whole lot of pro-choice Republican women are gonna notice too.

[GetTheRightVote]

17. No way, filibuster or have 30/40 years of hell, fight, fight, they must

to protect our future while fighting for our present

:kick: