Senate blows through DEFCON-1, nukes itself

[Sava]

That would probably depend on whether the Dems had just carried out a vast majority of fillibusters in US history. The numbers are clearly laid out above, feel free to defend them.

Absolutely.

The whole WAH WAH DEMOCRATIC FILIBUSTER is silly.

Once again, conservatives find themselves arguing against facts and reality.

At some point, these people need to be committed.

[rah]

That would probably depend on whether the Dems had just carried out a vast majority of fillibusters in US history. The numbers are clearly laid out above, feel free to defend them.

To me the numbers are immaterial. That's like saying one serial killer is better than the other because he killed fewer people. I didn't like it when the dems did it and I still didn't like it when the repugs did it.

[Sava]

BLAH BLAH BLAH

I HATE THAT DEMOCRATS USED THIS AS A TACTIC

IT PISSES ME OFF MORE THAN THEY NEVER DID

BLAH BLAH
I HATE FACTS

[kentonio]

To me the numbers are immaterial. That's like saying one serial killer is better than the other because he killed fewer people. I didn't like it when the dems did it and I still didn't like it when the repugs did it.

I don't know enough about the nominees that were fillibustered by the Dems. Were they reasonable nominees that were just obstructed on principle like the GOP have been doing?

[rah]

We should all head to colorado

[Imran Siddiqui]

I've been around since 05. Please find a post of me supporting the nuclear option.

Back in 2003, the Republicans were discussing the filibuster nuclear option. Interestingly, I saw this post by you (on Nov 14, 2003 - so you are even wrong about when you've "been around"):

http://apolyton.net/showthread.php/101646-Democrats-Obstruct-Judicial-Nominees?p=2486205&viewfull=1#post2486205

Why should being 'scary' have anything to do with whether one is a good judge or not?

I find many of the dem appointees 'scary', does that mean they ought to be prevented from taking a seat in the court?

MtG:

Why should one strive for a judicial balance? This automatically implies that the judiciary is not impartial, in that each justice ought to be considered on the basis of their political beliefs.

That's the really sad part about the shenanigans, political idelogy outweighing other judicial qualifications.

So, Ben... why do you wish for political ideology to outweigh judicial qualifications? Why should they be prevented from taking a seat in court?

[rah]

I don't know enough about the nominees that were fillibustered by the Dems. Were they reasonable nominees that were just obstructed on principle like the GOP have been doing?

It's all a matter of perspective. To each the others weren't reasonable because they didn't believe the same. So really no different.

[kentonio]

It's all a matter of perspective. To each the others weren't reasonable because they didn't believe the same. So really no different.

Well if there's no reasonable reason for fillibustering a nominee then whats the point in it being possible?

[Sava]

It's all a matter of perspective. To each the others weren't reasonable because they didn't believe the same. So really no different.

You are missing the point. It doesn't matter if the Dem's use of the filibuster was reasonable or not.

Why?

BECAUSE IT DIDN"T HAPPEN

It's like if I said, hey rah, it's unreasonable that you ate your mother's uterus cheese growing up.


Because you didn't.

[MRT144]

If the GOP had been the ones to go nuclear first in order to ram through right wing judges for lifetime appointments, how do you think it would be playing here and in the media?

It would have been unwarranted given that Democrats gave in more times than not. Only since Obama have Democrats found a backbone to politic.

[Ben Kenobi]

Once again, conservatives find themselves arguing against facts and reality.

Are you aware that Poly has been around longer than the filibuster for appellate nominees? Democrats started it in 2002. If Democrats don't like the filibuster then they shouldn't have introduced it. As for the nuclear option - we all remember how much you whined about the Bush nominees. Plenty of good and qualified men and women were rejected for the crime of not being 'pure' enough for the dims.

At least now we know it's open season. Better hope you don't lose the senate.

[rah]

I seem to remember Dems using it on Bush's nominees. Now my memory has gotten worse over the years but I didn't think it was that far gone.

[Ben Kenobi]

It doesn't matter if the Dem's use of the filibuster was reasonable or not.

Why?

BECAUSE IT DIDN"T HAPPEN

Umm, yeah it did Sava.

Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), “Yes, we are blocking judges by filibuster. That is part of the hallowed process around here.”

Are you calling Chucky Schumer a liar?

[MRT144]

I seem to remember Dems using it on Bush's nominees. Now my memory has gotten worse over the years but I didn't think it was that far gone.

When all was said and done Democrats fell on their knees and sucked it up.

[Ben Kenobi]

Daschle in 2004 "the Senate has confirmed a record 173 federal judges, while the three outstanding nominations have been rejected because of their records of judicial activism in service to extreme ideology."

Still believe that Democrat senator filibuster of Republican nominees didn't happen, Sava?