Perfect crystallization of what's wrong with the Democrats

[chequita guevara]

The problem with Democrats is that they think goatse is a way of practicing politics.

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
Your senator disagrees with your view of the matter.

I didn't see Ron Wyden quoted.

[Boris Godunov]

BTW, if you were referring to Schumer, you're taking that statement out of context. He was complaining about Judge Paez's nomination being held up in committee by Republicans via the kind of procedural flimflam I cited earlier.

He said right after that, "We don't have any problem with the senator from New Hampshire [Republican Bob Smith] debating to the end whether Judge Paez should be judge."

In other words, debate (and therefore filibuster) is fine, but holding them up in committee is not.

[DinoDoc]

I'm kind of curious how you defend Democrats voting to end all filibusters.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Boris Godunov
In other words, debate (and therefore filibuster) is fine, but holding them up in committee is not.

"The basic issue of holding up judgeships is the issue before us, not the qualifications of judges, which we can always debate. The problem is it takes so long for us to debate those qualifications. It is an example of Government not fulfilling its constitutional mandate because the President nominates, and we are charged with voting on the nominees." (Sen. Charles Schumer, Congressional Record, 3/7/00, p. S1211)

I think his opinion on debate is clear.

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
I'm kind of curious how you defend Democrats voting to end all filibusters.

They didn't. The 1995 vote was about legislative fillibusters, not judicial ones.

And only a minority of senate Dems voted in favor of it. That's hardly the entire Democratic party, and is indicative that it was a minority point of view.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Boris Godunov
That's hardly the entire Democratic party, and is indicative that it was a minority point of view.

I only brought it up for the amusement value and as a counterpoint to the Oerdin post I quoted originally.

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
"The basic issue of holding up judgeships is the issue before us, not the qualifications of judges, which we can always debate. The problem is it takes so long for us to debate those qualifications. It is an example of Government not fulfilling its constitutional mandate because the President nominates, and we are charged with voting on the nominees." (Sen. Charles Schumer, Congressional Record, 3/7/00, p. S1211)

I think his opinion on debate is clear.

I'll reiterate. In that same speech:

"we do not have any problem with the Senator from New Hampshire debating, to the end, whether Judge Paez should be a judge. We have a problem that he had to wait 4 1/2 years to do it."

Now, was Smith fillibustering for 4.5 years? Or is Schumer referring to the committee holdups?

[Lawrence of Arabia]

actually, i have the moral high ground