Actually I'm more inclined to hold our Democratic Senators accountable if Alito is confirmed. If the Supreme Court isn't worth fighting for, then what the hell is?
Posted by eagleye at January 24, 2006 09:35 AMnot enough votes to Filibuster?
Posted by Josh at January 24, 2006 09:38 AMI have been calling and writing and I am pissed.
The Republicans keep saying that the Democrats are making this a political battle, a party line vote, blah, blah....
This could not be farther from the truth.
I see the Repukes saying that he should be confirmed because the president wants it and Alito is qualified. The Dems are giving massive evidence as to why he should not be confirmed.
There are more disturbing reasons to oppose him.
Any and all rational people seem to be opposed.
This could be the greatest mistake ever made.
I cannot understand why the Repukes will not wake up and break party line. WTF is wrong with them. Are they really willing to trade overturning Roe for a dictatorship?
I thought that they would not be so ignorant; at least some of them.
Well, since our "elections" are fucking illegitimate (per the GAO et al.) it is the duty of patriots to filibuster this bastard.
Posted by God Of War at January 24, 2006 09:47 AMThe Republicans keep saying that the Democrats are making this a political battle, a party line vote, blah, blah....
*****
Who the hell cares what those traitorous assholes say? Screw them. The more shrill and pissed they are, the better the patriotic Constitution-loving opposition is doing.
Filibuster this asshole and send those traitors off the deep end.
Posted by God Of War at January 24, 2006 09:52 AMactually from a strategic standpoint a filibuster could be constrewed as moderate as long as it has to do with Alito's executive privilege POV and not Roe. As long as the DEM has their story straight (doubtful) it would go over and stand to be a unifying firm plank the Dems could lord over "strict constitutionalist" Repubs for a good long time.
DEM needs to start making Lemonade out of these lemons.
Posted by Josh at January 24, 2006 10:08 AMI'm just lurking around watching and reading your comments regarding the impending doom of our American way of life because of Alito.
It nice to be in control when important matters such as the Supreme Court crop up. Just think if John Kerry were President.... but he isn't...
No filibustser is coming, but just think, what if the vote is right around 60 or so votes which means a filibuster would have worked.....
As Peter decried on another post, you guys shot your wad in stopping Janice Rogers Brown et. al, and now you are paying the price. But you felt so good, so strong so invigorated when Teddy and Biden were blocking these nominations.....
Now the road block is open and the steamroller is coming through.
I thoroughly enjoy the wailing and gnashing of teeth. Keep up with the entertaining cries for justice from your liberal intellectually superior Democratic Senators....
Crappy is so full of hate, he loves to watch America turn into a dictatorship. Ah, the humanity! What happened to civility in discourse, huh? Those Goopers are so hateful!
Posted by iamcoyote at January 24, 2006 10:47 AMDear Iamacoyote,
Again with the dictatorship comments. Should I google another hundred comments from another hundred left wing bloggers who said the exact same BS about Reagan and Bush 41?
Its the same posts, over and over and over again.
Democratic leadership is NONexistent. This vote is NOT, as Harry Reid says, a matter of conscience, it's a matter of the future of democratic principles. ANY democratic senator who votes FOR Alito should be run out of the party! It's ludicrous to believe every republican senator is FOR Alito, but everyone of them knows what theyll face if they vote against partyline on this. Only when we see dems vote in unity, FORCING Lieberman to get in line, will we see a few Repubs get brave. I swear, I will NOT EVER vote for Democrats who've opted to play by the polls. Polls lie, democratic ideals do NOT!
Posted by bailey at January 24, 2006 12:13 PMShould I google another hundred comments from another hundred left wing bloggers who said the exact same BS about Reagan and Bush 41?
******
I didn't know they had bloggers in the late 80's and early 90's?
Posted by bbtb at January 24, 2006 12:22 PMAgain with the dictatorship comments. Should I google another hundred comments from another hundred left wing bloggers who said the exact same BS about Reagan and Bush 41?
Its the same posts, over and over and over again.
Carpe, all your post are the same thing over and over again, so whats the problem?
Posted by gosse1 at January 24, 2006 12:24 PMoh and by the way Bush himself said he wished this meaning America was a dictatorship as along as he was the dictator so what's the problem?
Posted by goose1 at January 24, 2006 01:00 PMDear crappy, you can't even get simple facts correct, you're so blind with hatred.
Its the same posts, over and over and over again.
I'm glad you're finally admitting you don't have anything new to say. Perhaps you'll see the light soon, and become the true progressive you wish to be.
Posted by iamcoyote at January 24, 2006 01:49 PMShould I google another hundred comments from another hundred left wing bloggers who said the exact same BS about Reagan and Bush 41?…Posted by CarpediemYou could try but I get 38 hits for "dictator Ronald Reagan," and most are using the term sarcastically. Other permutations of the search term give more hits, but those hits are for Reagan and some dictator he was supporting.
There were 4400 hits for "Dictator George W. Bush," not a lot by Google standards.
One has to wonder; why Republicans hate America so much they want to overthrow the constitution in favor of a bull-headed but incompetent leader. The Fourth Amendment is clear: no searches without warrants and no warrants without probable cause. Are they afraid to be free? Do they not want to share freedom with people of color and other genders?
The doctrine of a Unitary President that Alito espouses is a pernicious and, at bottom, a profoundly un-American theory. Bush has cited the theory, which has not been fully tested in court, more than 100 times in his signing statements.
Who came up with this innovative use of
presidential signing statements? Samuel Alito, Supreme Court nominee, way back in 1986. In a Feb. 5 memo, he wrote, "Since the president's approval is just as important as that of the House or Senate, it seems to follow that the president's understanding of the bill should be just as important as that of Congress." That is, of course, a very strange idea--which is why, until then, signing statements had been sporadic and rare. Courts have always looked solely to congressional debates in interpreting laws Congress has passed. In laws with veto-proof margins, the President's view is utterly irrelevant.
The problem with this theory is it violates the separation of powers by permitting a president to enact laws. Under the separation of power provisions of the American constitution, congress enacts laws, the president executes them, the judiciary judges the legality of the law, the execution, and the way people respond.
Signing statements. have been used before
Ronald Reagan used signing statements to challenge 71 legislative provisions, George H. W. Bush 146 and Bill Clinton 105. Bush has used them to challenge over 500 in just five years in office.
The reasons for previous usage seems to be to instruct executive agencies how the President wanted the law enforced, but one would have to examine each of them in order to have an accurate understanding of what was in the President's mind at that time.
Mike, you may want to be careful what you're googling. You may be construed as a "terrorist threat" with searches like that.
Posted by ann at January 24, 2006 02:47 PMWho came up with this innovative use of
presidential signing statements? Samuel Alito, Supreme Court nominee, way back in 1986. In a Feb. 5 memo...posted by Mike
*****
Actually, Mike, it is worse than that. The original person who came up with the "Unitary Executive" as utilized, in one way, through PST was Schmitt:
(Per link I posted earlier.)
"Nazi regime's anointed "Crown Jurist" Carl Schmitt. Schmitt's doctrine, that the charismatic head of state is the law, and can assert absolute dictatorial authority during periods of emergency, has been used to legitimize every totalitarian regime in the West, from Hitler, through Gen. Francisco Franco in Spain, through Gen. Augusto Pinochet in Chile, to President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney in the United States."
This is far more frightening.
News cycle is spinning this as about "abortion".
We cannot allow this.
I am extremely pro-choice, and I believe he is dangerous to reproductive rights, but this is about the Unitary Executive. People need to make sure that this is about what it is really about.
Posted by Anjha at January 24, 2006 04:19 PM"I cannot understand why the Repukes will not wake up and break party line. WTF is wrong with them. Are they really willing to trade overturning Roe for a dictatorship?"
Anjha, well my guess is they are being blackmailed, because I am sure there are some Republicans who are as concerned as Democrats. I bet Rove has something on every politician in Washington. That would be his style. Wonder how many GOPers Gannon fucked.
Posted by Judith at January 24, 2006 09:09 PM"DEM needs to start making Lemonade out of these lemons."
Josh, Democrats aren't going to start making lemonade or anything else. We have been waiting for them to make lemonade for a very long time, but they seem to have lost the directions.
Posted by at January 24, 2006 09:19 PM"News cycle is spinning this as about "abortion".
We cannot allow this."
Anjha, allow it? They have already succeeded. Besides, what the hell are we going to do?
Posted by Judith at January 24, 2006 09:36 PMbailey is absolutely right. Next time you donate to DNC, specify that you do not want your money to go to the campaign of the Democrats who voted for Alito or did not support filibuster. Need to put pressure where it counts. Aparently righting to them does not work.
The reason the republican senators from Blue states do not dare to go against the party line is that Republican machine would not only cut the money supply but put well financed candidates against them in Republican primaries.
Posted by suresh at January 25, 2006 08:26 AM