NO NUKES (in the US senate)

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
Senators Reach Deal to Avert Showdown on Judicial Nominees

Eisbär (llamasfur), Tuesday, 24 May 2005 01:50 (twenty-one years ago)

have at it while i go home.

Eisbär (llamasfur), Tuesday, 24 May 2005 01:50 (twenty-one years ago)

If Gary Bauer whines a lot, then I'm happy.

Ned Raggett (Ned), Tuesday, 24 May 2005 01:54 (twenty-one years ago)

NRO pissed and grasping at straws, TalkingPoints unhappy but conditionally positive.

Ned Raggett (Ned), Tuesday, 24 May 2005 01:56 (twenty-one years ago)

The people on all the lefty blogs are fucking pissing me off. all day long they talk about how superior they are to the republicans who march in lockstep/are inflexible, etc, but as soon as the news of this deal hit the wires they stormed the comments boards to talk about how this is a complete sell out, shamefull, yadda yadda. Calm the fuck down people. Its not a big win, but its a win. The republicans will accept nothing more than complete and utter annihilation of their enemies and they didnt get it this time around, which is nice. Obviously I'll eat my hat if this deal goes sour.. but for now Im fine with it. Especially watching the freepers get all apopleptic about it.

Actor Sizemore fails drug test with fake penis (jingleberries), Tuesday, 24 May 2005 02:09 (twenty-one years ago)

I'm increasingly in favor of moderates, not necessarily ideologically, but in terms of what they get done. Maybe the only way to move things back to the center is to focus on particular nominees. (I still think minority rights are important.)

youn, Tuesday, 24 May 2005 04:34 (twenty-one years ago)

Sen. Lindsey Graham was on TV last night saying that at least one of the three nominees who got floor votes in the compromise won't be approved (I'm guessing Rogers-Brown).

Ultimately this seems like kind of a wash to me; everyone gets to keep their powder dry for the big fight when Rehnquist retires.

rasheed wallace (rasheed wallace), Tuesday, 24 May 2005 11:22 (twenty-one years ago)

this is a totally fucking but predictable embarrassment by the U.S. Senate, a prime example of everything that's wrong with that particular institution. A fucking camel, the ugly horse designed by a committee. Rasheed's right--this is all setup for the inevitable Supreme Court noms.

"We came together and we did the unexpected," Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman
"We have lifted ourselves above politics." Former KKK henchman Byrd

Does anyone take these two seriously anymore?

don weiner, Tuesday, 24 May 2005 12:21 (twenty-one years ago)

Texas judge is a total cretin, yes?

I fully expect the Dems to continue coughin' up furballs when it comes to the Supreme Court.

Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Tuesday, 24 May 2005 12:51 (twenty-one years ago)

Dobson cries. I laugh and laugh and laugh.

Ned Raggett (Ned), Tuesday, 24 May 2005 13:55 (twenty-one years ago)

politicians should be banned from using metaphors

The Sensational Sulk (sexyDancer), Tuesday, 24 May 2005 14:04 (twenty-one years ago)

Actually what's been amusing in particular is the right wonks suddenly chastising themselves for encouraging the term 'nuclear option' -- thus Mr. Goldberg:

Whoever it was on the Republican side who coined the term "nuclear option," you should forever be banned from coining clever phrases. This has always struck me as an idiotic phrase on every level. First, it concedes that changing the rules would be radical and dangerous, which plays perfectly into the Democrats' hands. Second, it's factually untrue. Changing the rules wouldn't have blown up the Senate. The Democrats promised reaction to the rule change was the explosive part. If China announces they will launch a nuclear strike against the United States unless we ban usage of the phrase "Peking duck" in favor of "Beijing duck" we wouldn't be exercising the "nuclear option" by using the phrase "Peking duck." The Chinese would be when/if they retaliated unreasonably. But, no, the Republicans had to create a phrase which by its very definition made them sound unreasonable.

And lastly, the phrase simply smacks of that typical, annoying, testosterone drenched attitude of Hill Republicans. Noooo...we can't use a phrase like "restore comity" or "reform debate" for we are Klingons! We must talk the manly talk. We must show off our big swinging nuclear options.

Yeah, you'd think, dude.

Ned Raggett (Ned), Tuesday, 24 May 2005 14:16 (twenty-one years ago)

Orrin Hatch (a member of that moderate negotiating group) was on NPR last week talking about the negotiates, and he used some other term besides "nuclear option" to describe what the hard-line Republicans wanted. I forget what the phrase was, but it was quaint and silly sounding - once a course of action is slapped w/ the word NUCLEAR, there's not much chance of finding a happy-go-lucky alternative way to describe it. And if the Rs were the ones that coined the term, then lie in yr damn bed ya pansy asses.

David R. (popshots75`), Tuesday, 24 May 2005 14:31 (twenty-one years ago)

And lastly, the phrase simply smacks of that typical, annoying, testosterone drenched attitude of Hill Republicans. Noooo...we can't use a phrase like "restore comity" or "reform debate" for we are Klingons! We must talk the manly talk. We must show off our big swinging nuclear options.

well, it isn't as if bushco has totally foresworn using orwellian terms when it suits them.

i think that this compromise was probably the best that could be accomplished, given (a) the dems have only 45 seats in the senate; and (b) they could count on only 4 senators to stop the drive to kill the judicial filibuster.

Eisbär (llamasfur), Tuesday, 24 May 2005 15:59 (twenty-one years ago)

So are the chances that Bush will get to appoint two Supreme Court justices before the midterms now higher or lower (O'Connor being the other likely departure)? I could see arguments for both cases.

rasheed wallace (rasheed wallace), Tuesday, 24 May 2005 16:17 (twenty-one years ago)

NO NUDES (in the US senate)

Ian Riese-Moraine's Plateau Rouge! (Eastern Mantra), Tuesday, 24 May 2005 16:20 (twenty-one years ago)

I think the odds are about the same. I don't think this really changed very much at all.

Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Tuesday, 24 May 2005 16:23 (twenty-one years ago)

personally, i had no problem w/ shutting down THIS senate -- considering the horseshit that they've passed already and the horseshit that they're getting ready to pass.

Eisbär (llamasfur), Tuesday, 24 May 2005 16:25 (twenty-one years ago)

Yeah, I wouldn't have minded seeing the energy bill and the asbestos-reform bill gummed up in the works.

rasheed wallace (rasheed wallace), Tuesday, 24 May 2005 16:27 (twenty-one years ago)

This whole thing is kind of unsavory cuz on the one hand I don't find the filibuster very thrilling and it would have been particularly ironic if conservatives had managed to undermine it only to be hoisted by that petard on another day. On the other hand, it's nice that the current Republican trend of run roughshod over the opposition and basically doing whatever they please was at least momentarilly derailed.

Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Tuesday, 24 May 2005 16:28 (twenty-one years ago)

interesting shoutout to frist in that dobson release - he's officially the american taliban candidate of 08 fer sure now huh?

j blount (papa la bas), Tuesday, 24 May 2005 17:07 (twenty-one years ago)

If Bill Frist is a viable presidential candidate I would be very shocked.

Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Tuesday, 24 May 2005 17:10 (twenty-one years ago)

Conspiracy theory overheard in the hallway in my office: this pie-in-the-face for Frist was engineered by Rove & Co. to smooth the glide path for Jeb in 2008. Bush still gets his judges, Frist gets sent packing, and the dynasty lives on. The conservative "outrage" from Bauer et al was carefully orchestrated.

rasheed wallace (rasheed wallace), Tuesday, 24 May 2005 17:22 (twenty-one years ago)

If Rove was seriously advancing that as a plan, he's going more insane than we realized.

Ned Raggett (Ned), Tuesday, 24 May 2005 17:24 (twenty-one years ago)

That doesn't seem terribly credible to me (esp. cuz if Jeb Bush is really worried about Bill Frist then he's not going to be a serious candidate anyway.)

Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Tuesday, 24 May 2005 17:26 (twenty-one years ago)

Yeah, Ned, Alex, I posted that more as just an amusing aside about what some folks are saying than as a legit possibility. There's definitely some gamesmanship going on within the Republican Party though, and it's not just confined to the obvious struggles between moderates and conservatives, I think. There's a big rift between social and fiscal conservatives, for example, and between movement conservatives and big business. And then there's the neocons, and the vestigial Dixiecrats, and on and on. At some point the tent is no longer big enough ...

rasheed wallace (rasheed wallace), Tuesday, 24 May 2005 17:33 (twenty-one years ago)

but doesn't this sort of thing make their tent look big? look, we let our moderates win too! of course, as of today lot's of folks are bad mouthing john mccain, who i think is the bigger fish for rove/jeb '08 to fry... and if frist runs, he could probably stand to have mccain be taking some bad guy points too.

m.

msp (mspa), Tuesday, 24 May 2005 21:25 (twenty-one years ago)

this week's new yorker sure reads like mccain's gonna run.

hstencil (hstencil), Tuesday, 24 May 2005 21:32 (twenty-one years ago)

No, I don't think it makes their tent look big. It makes them look fractured and adrift. It makes it look like the leadership is unable to exert any party discipline. Frist didn't "let the moderates win." He got beat by John McCain and Lindsey Graham.

rasheed wallace (rasheed wallace), Tuesday, 24 May 2005 22:18 (twenty-one years ago)

i think that the money guys (i.e., the wall street types who [supposedly] really run things w/n the GOP) are the ones who put the kibosh on this, so that all of the corporate/wealthy-friendly goodies don't get stalled over all this jesus-grandstanding.

Eisbär (llamasfur), Tuesday, 24 May 2005 22:37 (twenty-one years ago)

they will eat mccain alive. he'll never get out of the primaries.

kyle (akmonday), Tuesday, 24 May 2005 22:54 (twenty-one years ago)

Anyone who thinks John McCain has even a remote shot at the presidential nomination is a fool. He is over, over, over and has WAY too many enemies in his own party.

don weiner, Tuesday, 24 May 2005 23:57 (twenty-one years ago)

MODERATE REBELLION!!

youn, Wednesday, 25 May 2005 00:07 (twenty-one years ago)

oops, moderate.. rebellion...

youn, Wednesday, 25 May 2005 00:08 (twenty-one years ago)

"Anyone who thinks John McCain has even a remote shot at the presidential nomination is a fool."

well, i mean, yeah i probably have no clue like this person too...

http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/0525/p03s01-uspo.html

some of the other potential candidates on this thread just strike me as total wing nuts. i really can't imagine the success of a senator or governor who has made it his job to ignore his job and instead bend and break every rule possible to please guilt trip blackmailing minority of christian fundamentalists. seriously... Frist is one of my senators and he personally strikes me as someone who would give me shit for wearing jeans to church.

i guess i was under the impression that your average american doesn't want anybody telling them what to believe.

mccain, a gop jackass just the same, is at least a little more down the middle on the important things like overstepping power boundaries. a moderate has the grace to at least give the dissenting minority a bit of bone, especially considering that even the minority that didn't vote for him is still his constituency. they still work for us.

i'm sure you're right that there's other, more gop-popular candidates who might have a better chance of not being a windbag to the mass majority of everybody else. i guess i was just trotting silliness out. we were talkin funny plots and theories. i should know better than to be bothered by being called a fool, especially talking politics... won't be the last time.
m.

msp (mspa), Wednesday, 25 May 2005 01:56 (twenty-one years ago)

i really can't imagine the success of a senator or governor who has made it his job to ignore his job and instead bend and break every rule possible to please guilt trip blackmailing minority of christian fundamentalists.

Um... you see... I hate to break it to you but there's this guy... and somehow he's President now.

walter kranz (walterkranz), Wednesday, 25 May 2005 04:27 (twenty-one years ago)

some of the other potential candidates on this thread just strike me as total wing nuts.

PRESIDENT SANTORUM!!!

Eisbär (llamasfur), Wednesday, 25 May 2005 04:34 (twenty-one years ago)

Um... you see... I hate to break it to you but there's this guy... and somehow he's President now.

aw man, i have to say something stupid at least once a post, just to keep the pickins fresh...

[insert here]
m.

msp (mspa), Wednesday, 25 May 2005 05:39 (twenty-one years ago)

gonna run /= gonna win


ya fuckin' douche

hstencil (hstencil), Wednesday, 25 May 2005 05:45 (twenty-one years ago)

McCain surely has no standing with the Republican base, but I'm wondering if he might be attracted to running as some kind of third-party "unity" candidate with a moderate Dem. It would make sense for him -- he'd be spared the primary sparring which took him out in 2000, he could fundraise soley for a national campaign, etc. The party fissures made apparent by the filibuster compromise, and perhaps more importantly by the stem-cell vote (which down the road could set up a clash between Xian fundies and Big Pharma), could reach some sort of critical mass by 2008. I know it's popular to think that the Rovian evangelical juggernaut will roll on forever, but I think it's obvious that the Republicans are straining under the weight of their majority, that because of their long climb back to power they have to many favors to return and to many masters to serve, and eventually they'll be back down again.

rasheed wallace (rasheed wallace), Wednesday, 25 May 2005 10:44 (twenty-one years ago)

mccain will NEVER run as a third party candidate; i agree that he's not quite as shiny as he was in 2000, if anything he's made himself even more hated within the party over the past eight years, and that he doesn't have the issue that accounted for most of his popularity in 00 and dovetailed with his branding nicely (in alot of ways he was the perot of 00) BUT his name recognition has only risen, he's the prolife moderate meaning he'll be palatable enough to the dobson's (guarantee: there will be a third party candidate if the republicans nominate a prochoice candidate like giuliani)(guarantee: the republicans will not nominate a prochoice candidate) but without that 'bigoted antiscience wingnut' stench that hangs around santorum and increasingly frist. in 2000 bushco was a juggernaut way before the race was underway and even then it took dirty tricks to put mccain away, i'm not sure if there is a juggernaut in 08 (maybe i'm overlooking someone obvious)(i'm not forgetting jeb), the race looks wideopen to me.

j blount (papa la bas), Wednesday, 25 May 2005 14:54 (twenty-one years ago)

The retarded American Public will never vote for a seventy-two year old man who was brainwashed by the commies and now has a nasty cancer scar on his face.

Especially one who might have a black baby.

Pleasant Plains /// (Pleasant Plains ///), Wednesday, 25 May 2005 15:33 (twenty-one years ago)

What do you mean? Reagan won handily!

Ned Raggett (Ned), Wednesday, 25 May 2005 15:34 (twenty-one years ago)

maybe the dingo ate his baby

j blount (papa la bas), Wednesday, 25 May 2005 15:40 (twenty-one years ago)


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.