GOP Plans 'Marathon' on Judicial Nominations

Debate to Spotlight Blocked Nominees

Saturday, November 8, 2003; Page A01

A brewing rebellion by conservative activists has prompted Senate Republican leaders to plan to devote at least 30 straight hours of debate next week to their bid to confirm a handful of judicial nominees being blocked by Democrats. The Republicans are bringing in food and cots for the "Justice for Judges Marathon," scheduled for Wednesday night through Friday morning.

Despite the showiness, neither side expects the spectacle to change a single vote or resolve the bitter impasse. Like previous acts in the high-decibel fight over the lifetime judgeships, the planned all-nighter is unlikely to stir the typical voter's attention or concern, according to pollsters and lawmakers.

Still, both parties see the past nine months of angry wrangling over President Bush's nominees as a prime motivational issue for their most loyal supporters -- the politically active GOP conservatives and Democratic liberals who can be counted on to give money and turn out voters if they are fired up over sharply partisan issues such as judgeships.

But the standoff also carries considerable risks for both parties. By continuing to filibuster a few of Bush's most conservative nominees, Democrats could make it easier for the GOP to portray them as politically motivated obstructionists -- a long-running Republican theme.

more…
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A14075-2003Nov7.html

Byrd beats Strom Thurmond's filibuster record of 24 hours and 18 minutes.

Lindsey Graham, Strom Thurmond's successor, was reportedly considering breaking Thurmond's record to protest the democrats' actions on judicial nominees.

They won't actually be giving long speeches. The word filibuster is a little misleading. All it will be is a bunch of senators sitting around for a day. Republicans will give some speeches about how the democrats are violating the constitution and the need for "up and down" votes and the democrats will give speeches about how the judicial nominees suck. It will probably just be uneventful. However, it will get a decent amount of media attention. It could hurt us because I don't think most people will like the idea that a minority of senators are preventing a nominee from being confirmed. However, at the same time, it could hurt Bush by pointing out how extreme is judges are, particularly Pryor.

...and get them as far from Washington as possible.



:-)

...as if your political future depended on it.

Because it does.

This will receive a fair amount of media coverage when it begins. The democrats need to seize this opportunity to make this debate receive a huge amount of media coverage and to determine what that media coverage includes. If they are bold and ballsy they can dominate that coverage.

Every democratic Senator needs to make exactly the same point when it is his or her turn to speak. That point is that the republicans are lying hypocrites about the blocking of Bush's judicial nominees. The democrats should not be overly polite or genteel. It needs to be shocking in its bluntness. It needs to be newsworthy.

The democrats need to emphasize these points:

1. Republicans blocked 167 Clinton judicial nominees.

2. Democrats have blocked 4 Bush judicial nominees.

3. Bush has had 168 judicial nominees confirmed in less than 3 years, which is a record number for that length of time.

4. The vacancy rate in the federal courts is at its lowest level in 13 years.

These points are all sourced on this thread. http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=102&topic_id=204138#204298

If the democrats hammer home these 4 points and accuse the republicans of being hypocrites and liars over and over again, the media will cover that story and it will be big news. People will remember that the republicans were exposed as hypocritical liars. If the democrats talk about the qualifications or lack thereof of the nominees it will be boring and people will remember only that democrats are blocking some of Bush's nominees. It will be playing right into the republican plan.

When it comes to blocking right wing judges I want them to be politically motivated obstructionists!

If you have a Demcratic Senator, email him or her to continue rejecting
extreme right-wing judges. Federal judges are appointed for life.

This is a big deal. Judges who don't value civil liberties may serve a higher court for the next 35 years if the Senate approves them.

But the standoff also carries considerable risks for both parties. By continuing to filibuster a few of Bush's most conservative nominees, Democrats could make it easier for the GOP to portray them as politically motivated obstructionists -- a long-running Republican theme.

..or else they will portray you as standing up to them.

At what point will the Dem pols get the nads to laugh at this BS instead of acting like it needs to be defended?