Biden: Alito should get up-or-down vote

WASHINGTON - Samuel Alito should get an up-or-down vote on his Supreme Court nomination, a Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee said Sunday, playing down the chances of a filibuster.

“My instinct is we should commit,” said Sen. Joseph Biden, D-Del., minimizing prospects of the Senate maneuver that would prevent final action on President Bush’s choice to replace retiring Justice Sandra Day O’Connor.

Other committee Democrats, however, said it was too soon to tell whether a filibuster might be necessary, citing initial concerns about Alito’s conservative record from the bench.

Bush last week selected Alito, a former Reagan administration lawyer who is currently a judge on the Philadelphia-based 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, after White House counsel Harriet Miers withdrew her nomination amid withering criticism from conservatives.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9949579/

We can't afford to let ScAlito onto the SCOTUS.

:spank:

I need a good photo of Biden now! :mad:

also told him to commit to Clarence Thomas.

and gave in all too frequently.

Go to hell turn-coat!

Why is this not surprising?

When do our whore politicians learn that sucking off the rightwingnuts is NOT going to endear them to the rightwingnuts or us?

The super camera hog who would paint himself blue and light himself afire to get face time.

Grow a fucking spine, you gutless SOB! I hope you're up for reelection in '06, you coward, because if you are I will PERSONALLY do everything that I can to be sure you don't make it out of the primary, let alone win the general election. Sell out America a little more, why don't you?

MojoXN

Let's run up the white flag and surrender to the Republicans again, because if we fight it will only make people mad at us!

Biden is a DINO WUSS.

Biden would be talking about how great the war is going.

he and "holy" Joe just shut up and sit down.

Hi all,

Elections have consequences, and that moron Bush won (stole?) the election.

THAT was the time for the ideological arguments. We lost that argument. If Alito is qualified, and there are no unseen character issues, he should get the up or down vote.

It should be noted that in three of four votes that Mr. Alito voted on, he came down on the side of Pro Choice, he is written in favor of gay rights...on the other hand he has held some vile opinions.

I am NOT a fan of his, or the moron that selected him, but they won...these are the consequences of that win.

I am very sorry if this opinion offends or angers any of you. If seems that many of my posts do that. I want you to know that I am not trolling or trying to upset people on purpose, I just feel that I have an opinion (as wrong as it may be) and I want to voice it. I know that some times my opinion are not welcome here, and if this is one of those times...sorry.

Democratic Sentors represent more constituents and more voters that Republican Senators. Do *those* elections have consequences too?

http://gadflyer.com/flytrap/index.php?Week=200511#1598
http://gadflyer.com/flytrap/index.php?Week=200507#1513
http://www.webfaerie.com/faerie_bytes/?p=52#more-52

I have to say, until now, I've seen this phrase used almost exclusively by right-wingers as a short hand for "we won (by whatever means) so we can do whatever we want and everybody else can eat shit."

Lately though, I've begun to embrace the concept and use the phrase myself, when speaking to people who voted for Bush (or didn't vote) and now are complaining that things are tough for them. For instance, "Lost your job? Well, elections have consequences. Have a friend or loved one in Iraq or in danger of being sent to Iraq? Well, elections have consequences. Don't like the economy or the "direction' of the economy? Well, elections have consequences. Been hurt by a company or a doctor and can't get a day in court? Well, elections have consequences."

And so forth...

**edited for clarity**

I mean, you state unequivocally and definitely that he's "qualified." Does that mean he holds a bar ticket? Or is there more to it than that? Does he represent an ideological mainstream on corporate rights versus individual rights? Is he in tune with the thinking of most Americans on environmental issues? Does he believe and practice the ideal of a federal government comprised of three co-equal branches?

Please elucidate, because from my reading of his court opinions, I find Mr. Alito to be woefully lacking in either insight or erudition that would support your statement.

was a party, then he broke that promised and sat on a case where Vanguard was a party without even disclosing the fact that he owned about $400,000 in Vanguard (and I'm sure it is merely a coincidence that he ruled in favor or Vanguard -- hell, he rules in favor of the corporation every time -- even when he isn't heavily invested in that particular company). Instead of disqualifying himself as he promised he would, Alito concluded that he was qualified. Here's a link:
<http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x5255510>

Is this what they mean when they say Alito is "qualified"?

Hi,

If you re-read my post, you will see that no where did I "state unequivocally and definitely that he's "qualified."...Rather I said "if Alito is qualified."

People's lives are at stakes. My freedoms as a woman. You want to fuck around with that too bad. I'm not letting these assholes take that away. Do you think they would let a hard-core liberal on the bench even if Kerry won as he did and took the office? Hell no!

Hi,

When you write "Do you think they would let a hard-core liberal on the bench even if Kerry won as he did and took the office? Hell no!" you are 100%!

However, I consider 'them' to be hate filled, scared little mysogenistic morons, and I don't want to go down to their level.

I'm not convinced that he did win...oh he "won" like he "won" the 2000 Election.

As the poster below accurately points out, we have 45 Democratic Senators and we represent the MAJORITY of the population. We have BOTH Senators in: California, Illinois, Michigan, New York and New Jersey. Those 10 Democratic Senator's in population terms COMPLETELY wipe out the Republic Senators in: Idaho, Utah, Kansas, Arizona, Kentucky, Wyoming, Oklahoma and Missouri.

So WE represent the majority of the population.

Also as I've previously pointed out, Junior now has 35% of the population supporting him, which means that 65% of the population doesn't support him. Therefore he's in no position, nor does he have any right to be nominating ANY Judge for a LIFELONG tenure on the bench, nor does he have ANY right to be proposing any form of legislation.

We need to put up roadblock's to Junior's extreme agenda, because like Junior and the Republic Party in general, Junior's agenda is ONLY supported by the lunatic fringe of society.

n/t

of Americans should be taken away or legal precedents should be overturned for ideological reasons deserves an "up or down vote". There should be real advice and consent. Maybe one day, a right you enjoy might be taken away and I'll find you and say "up or down vote".

Consequences like ignoring warnings before 9/11?

Consequences like a tax cuts for the rich & benefit cuts for everyone else?

Just a few consequences of one flagrantly stolen election & one probably stolen election.

"Elections have consequences"--what an original phrase! Well, not exactly. In this article, it refers to the 2002 elections. Note the source:
www.intellectualconservative.com/article1095.html

This article goes back to the 1996 elections:
The Republican message is much closer to what most Americans believe. That is why Bill Clinton intercepted that message in his State of the Union address and is running with it now, during the election campaign. Once re-elected, he will of course drop the pretense and go back to the usual liberal big-spending, growing government, racial quotas and soft-on-crime judicial appointees.
www.trettel.com/ccrc/essays/essay6.html

Here's a more recent use of the phrase:
Consider this reasonable scenario: In the event Chief Justice William Rehnquist retires after the court's current session, Mr. Bush would elevate a like-mined associate justice as the chief, and fill the vacancy on the court with a conservative. This would not change the ideological makeup of the court at all.

Nevertheless, it is inconceivable that Senate Democrats would resist the intense pressure exerted upon them by the abortion lobby and other left-wing interest groups. They would almost certainly declare that either one -- and probably both -- of the nominees, whoever they were, represented "extreme or extraordinary cases," triggering the filibuster. Under no circumstances should such an outrageous "compromise" be considered by any Republican.
www.washingtontimes.com/op-ed/20050518-093636-3041r.htm

Can't you find any newer Right Wing Talking Points?

So why didn't Miers get the up and down vote? This is why I think Reid was brilliant in what he did with Miers so he can save the fight for this guy. Maybe he knew their plan(s) with her for this guy.

Biden will be the next candidate to bring Joementum to a Democratic primary and ride that wave of wishy-washyness to a series of third and fourth place primary finishes before he runs out of money and drops out.

:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl: Ain't gonna happen Joey!

food. It comes in a pretty package but too much of him will make you throw up. I am sorry I got decieved at least I woke up before any damage was done. Am I forgiven?

That incident during 1988, when he plagiarized a speech by Neil Kinnock. If he did choose to throw his hat into the ring in 2008, during the Democratic Primaries, I don't think it'd be too long before one of the other candidates brought up to Biden the plagiarizing incident.