I think the Dems have 42 Senators. Do you think 41 will filibuster Alito?

still_one

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Fri Nov-25-05 01:39 PM
Original message

I think the Dems have 42 Senators. Do you think 41 will filibuster Alito?

I am NOT including the moderate republicans

This is the issue that I am watching very closely. Not if we win or lose, but who stands for principle. Even if the repukes force the nuclear option because they know a filibuster will occur, it will tell me who we should support and who we shouldn't

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

KingFlorez

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Fri Nov-25-05 01:40 PM
Response to Original message

1. 44 Dem Senators

And it's hard to tell how many would filibuster

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Savannah Progressive

(272 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Fri Nov-25-05 01:42 PM
Response to Original message

2. I would bet on NO Filibuster

After all John Roberts wasn't Fascist enough to trigger it. They gave lame excuses on why though. My favorite was "he was replacing a Conservative on the Court. This maintains the Ballance of the court".

Oh, I didn't realize there was a Constitutional Requirement that Fascists and Racists had a quota to be filled on the Court.

Despite the hype from the fundraisers of the DLC, expect Alito to sail right through.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

still_one

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Fri Nov-25-05 01:44 PM
Response to Reply #2

4. so you assume that the pro choice repukes will vote for him also?

Edited on Fri Nov-25-05 01:46 PM by still_one

incidently, alito has quite a paper trail that roberts didn't

some of his activities very questionable

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Charlie Brown

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Fri Nov-25-05 01:54 PM
Response to Reply #4

11. Yes, they will

Edited on Fri Nov-25-05 01:57 PM by Charlie Brown

Specter, Chaffee, Snowe, and Collins (are there any other pro-choice Repubs in the Senate besides these four?) will all go along w/Alito b/c they are hypocrites who do not stand by their principals.

Incidentally, even if all four of them voted against Alito, he would still get a majority vote.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Savannah Progressive

(272 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sat Nov-26-05 04:03 AM
Response to Reply #4

20. I would put money on Alito being confirmed

He may have a paper trail, and we may well question his activities, however nothing has gained traction.

I heard he ruled on a case he had previously ruled on as the Trial judge. the response from everyone, ho hum, whatever.

He's going to sail through. Pray that one of the good Judges like Ginsburg doesn't die or retire. I shudder to think of the Scalia clone we would be stuck with.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

onehandle

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Fri Nov-25-05 01:43 PM
Response to Original message

3. No. nt

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

catmother

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Fri Nov-25-05 01:44 PM
Response to Original message

5. no. n/t

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Charlie Brown

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Fri Nov-25-05 01:46 PM
Response to Original message

6. Certainly not Johnson, Lincoln, Dorgan, Feingold, and Lieberman

No filibuster.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

still_one

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Fri Nov-25-05 01:50 PM
Response to Reply #6

8. excuse me, but the that agreement did NOT refer to

not recusing himself when he had interest in Vanguard, or his beliefs that 1 vote 1 person is not necessarily valid

This is NOT appeals or lower court appointments, so I think their filibuster agreement does NOT apply

It will be interesting to see how much guts the dems and pro choice repukes have

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

electropop

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Fri Nov-25-05 01:53 PM
Response to Reply #8

10. Exactly: serious moral and Constitutional defects with Alito.

We have pretty solid ground to say that he is an exceptional case, and make them look very bad when they pull the illegal Nukular Option.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

still_one

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Fri Nov-25-05 01:57 PM
Response to Reply #10

13. Thanks

For nothing else, I was getting depressed at the cynics responses

Look at the election in November. The Democrats won in a major way. If nothing else I believe this will be a huge fight

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

electropop

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Fri Nov-25-05 03:59 PM
Response to Reply #13

19. Dems need to continue the offensive.

We've seen a little bit of honesty the last few weeks; if we keep it up, we will flip Congress, and probably impeach the Regime.

The '05 election was very encouraging. Bush made it a referendum on himself and lost. He came over here to VA and campaigned for Kilgore: next day, Kilgore dropped by another 6 points. Bush is poison.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

lovelaureng

(434 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Fri Nov-25-05 01:46 PM
Response to Original message

7. No, nt.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

skipos

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Fri Nov-25-05 01:51 PM
Response to Original message

9. No. Didn't Ginsberg pass even though the senate

was controlled by Republicans?

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

still_one

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Fri Nov-25-05 01:59 PM
Response to Reply #9

14. because ginsberg nomination was passed among the repukes first

before it was brought up

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Karmadillo

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Fri Nov-25-05 01:55 PM
Response to Original message

12. Nope. Keeping their powder dry for an unspecified purpose

at some future date.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

still_one

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Fri Nov-25-05 01:59 PM
Response to Reply #12

15. If this isn't the time, then nothing ever will be

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Hardrada

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Fri Nov-25-05 02:10 PM
Response to Original message

16. No, because we are nowhere near the goal

of having 9 conservative Catholic males on the SC.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Hippo_Tron

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Fri Nov-25-05 02:24 PM
Response to Original message

17. 45 Dem Senators

For all intensive purposes Jeffords (I) is a Democrat so that makes it 45.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

depakid

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Fri Nov-25-05 02:34 PM
Response to Original message

18. If they don't get their act together

Edited on Fri Nov-25-05 03:06 PM by depakid

They might as well kiss 2006 goodbye.

This guy's corrupt- he ruled on a case he had a financial interest in- even after testifying to Congress that he's recuse himself on any case regarding that company.

If the Dems have any hope of taking back the House and Senate- corruption's the one issue that could nationalize the election, and if they pass on it here, they've pretty well forfeited their right to use it.

I'll make a prediction right now- if the Dems let Alito on the Court, they'll remain the minority party.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

DU AdBot (1000+ posts)

Wed May 08th 2024, 02:46 PM
Response to Original message

Advertisements [?]

Top

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.