AP: Democrats say they won't block Gonzales nomination

By JESSE J. HOLLAND
Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON (AP) - Democrats won't try to filibuster Alberto Gonzales' nomination to be attorney general but will hold extensive debates in the Senate over his role in developing the Bush administration's policies on treating foreign detainees, the Senate's top Democrat said Tuesday.

"There will be an up-or-down vote," Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid of Nevada told reporters after the Democrats huddled together for their weekly planning session.

A filibuster, a parliamentary tactic for delaying Senate action, would require Republicans, who hold a 55-44 majority in the Senate, to win over at least five Democrats - or four Democrats plus Vermont Sen. James Jeffords, an independent - to put Gonzales in office.

Reid predicted that at least 25 or 30 Democrats would vote against Gonzales but said "there was a decision made not to filibuster."

more: http://www.kstp.com/article/stories/S5983.html?cat=87

or its ideals. He is the face of Bush and Bush alone.

Spineless bastards.

not even close to a majority. care to explain why they need to do more?

Just to point out the obvious.

There are still over 39 dems in the senate, they could at least attempt to rally the party. They could try to go across the isle and actually convince some repub to do the right thing. They could actually make a attempt to fight for something based on principal even though they know they won't win.

maybe less, maybe more, but there will be official votes against the bastard.
The die is cast, they will move on to the next issue.

and those who are going to vote for, are probably DLC members. Rat Bastards should get a pair. :puke:

Since one of our GIs are captured, we should send a message to those Dems who voted yes to Torture Guy and let them know who they just voted for War Criminal Alberto Gonzales.

It's time to take her down in the primary.

And if it comes to having a republican senator or a Democratic Senator, I'll go Demo any day of the week, they have enough senators allready.

That's reason enough to work against her in the 2006 primary.

:beer: :toast: :beer:

We won't be getting any alcoholic beverages at the detention and torture camps we're undoubtedly going to be forced to attend in the near future. There will be NO DISSENT.......and all those that do dare dissent will be dealt with in the NEO-CON way! Ahhhhhhhh......electricity will be in the air, and my testicles.
:grr:

Screw 'em, I'll go down fighting.

Keeping the opposition guessing by sending mixed messages.

Reid sayin' one thing,...Kennedy and Durbin another.

:shrug:

I hope they pull a surprise attack (filibuster) and kick neoCON ass.

OH! HOW! I! HOPE! :bounce:

They sound as if in this game (as they seem to think it's a game) you only have a limited amount of filibusters and that you don't want to run out when something might be even more important (like Social Security, where their re-election bids might stand in the balance)

However, what stops them from filibusting Condi, filibusting Gonzales, and filibusting the flushing down the toilet of Social Security???

Do they have by law a limited amount of filibustering to do?

Or are they still walking on eggs, lest someone might think they are opposed to the Busholini regime...

Only 13 Democrats opposed her, and 41 were needed to block a vote.

hearing? Huh??

We really must do something about our own freaking party! No wonder we never stop getting spanked by the Repugs!

Oh Hillary and Chuck, I'm a New York voter! I have a long memory!

... I, for one, think this is the right move.

If the Dems are able to continually highlight what undoubtedly will be even more abuses that they'd be powerless to stop without more Congressional power, it allows them to clearly show that Dems are the good guys while avoiding an untrue 'obstructionist' label.

I also think that Reid and company may be looking at how Bush's second term develops. Right now, aside from the "elections" you can't call the post-election months as very good for Dear Leader. He's clearly behind on Social Security, Iraq continues to beat on him (even the election is working against him a little in that people seem to be asking why we can't get out if they had an election and "now have democracy" as the Wingnuts have been crowing), and it looks like the RNC is going to have a grassroots energized by one of our new lead pitbulls, Howard Dean, to contend against in '06.

Give 'em enough rope and all of that.

I just hope Dean, Boxer, Reid and company can do some real damage to the Repunk agenda in the next few months ... but I get a little more cautiously hopeful by the day.

I will not stand around another 4 doing nothing just to avoid the label obstructionist. Would it have been obstructionist for a German in the 1930's to stand up to the Nazi program? Sometimes just standing by and doing nothing is worse than being the perpetrator! We know the truth yet we do nothing! It is sickening. These folks are blatantly immoral war criminals. Any Democrat who helps them in any way is no better than a Nazi collaborator.

I WILL NOT be complicit for fear of people thinking I am an obstructionist! That is spineless and immoral (as a party, not you per se).

<sarcasm>

Fuckers.

We have a serious problem in this country. A lot of people like Bush.
I just saw this bumpersticker today:

I was ready to puke.
People (some) think we have the right to torture!
It's 9/11 all the time.
War on terror all the time.
The country is wounded, in critical shape, and we are falling apart.
We are divided and somehow we have to pull it back together. Pointing out in this debate that Gonzales is not a good representative of American ideals is a good marker for the Democrats to throw down here, but they cannot stop him and Bush.
We have to move on to the next battle.

--

A vote for Gonzales is a vote for torture.