The Death Of Common Sense
As many of you can guess, neither of us are happy over this move on the Constitutional Option. A deal was struck this afternoon, avoiding the impending showdown. But the deal isn’t a good one to be sure. (Hat-Tip to Hugh Hewitt for the memo; Bench Memos on NRO didn't want to load.)
http://hughhewitt.com/
And it reads as such:
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING ON JUDICIAL NOMINATIONS
We respect the diligent, conscientious efforts, to date, rendered to the Senate by Majority Leader Frist and Democratic Leader Reid. This memorandum confirms an understanding among the signatories, based upon mutual trust and confidence, related to pending and future judicial nominations in the 109th Congress.
This memorandum is in two parts. Part I relates to the currently pending judicial nominees; Part II relates to subsequent individual nominations to be made by the President and to be acted upon by the Senate’s Judiciary Committee.
We have agreed to the following:
Part I: Commitments on Pending Judicial Nominations
1) Votes for Certain Nominees. We will vote to invoke cloture on the following judicial nominees: Janice Rogers Brown (D.C. Circuit), William Pryor (11th Circuit), and Priscilla Owen (5th Circuit).
2) Status of Other Nominees. Signatories make no commitment to vote for or against cloture on the following judicial nominees: William Myers (9th Circuit) and Henry Saad (6th Circuit).
Part II: Commitments for Future Nominations
1) Future Nominations. Signatories will exercise their responsibilities under the Advice and Consent Clause of the United States Constitution in good faith. Nominees should only be filibustered under extraordinary circumstances, and each signatory must use his or her own discretion and judgment in determining whether such circumstances exist.
2) Rules Changes. In light of the spirit and continuing commitments made in this agreement, we commit to oppose the rules changes in the 109th Congress, which we understand to be any amendment to or interpretation of the Rules of the Senate that would force a vote on a judicial nomination by means other than unanimous consent or Rule XXII.
We believe that, under Article II, Section 2, of the United States Constitution, the word "Advice" speaks to consultation between the Senate and the President with regard to the use of the President’s power to make nominations. We encourage the Executive branch of government to consult with members of the Senate, both Democratic and Republican, prior to submitting a judicial nomination to the Senate for consideration.
This isn’t a deal. It’s political suicide, and the seven Republicans that concocted this cockamamie plan were: Sens. Mike DeWine of Ohio, Susan Collins of Maine, Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, Lincoln Chaffee of Rhode Island, John McCain of Arizona, John W. Warner of Virginia and Olympia J. Snowe of Maine.
So, here’s my take on this. First, these seven, which are sure to be hailed with accolades from the traitorous press, sold out five judges to make this deal. That isn’t how this should happen; all of them deserved an up-or-down vote. A compromise should have come in the form of pulling the trigger. I’m apt to wonder why Frist didn’t rein these seven in when the idea of them negotiating with the Democrats came up. These seven RINOs could barely be counted on for a half-way decent vote, and Frist allowed them to negotiate on behalf of the party. There’s my initial ire; I hold Frist culpable in this, but that comes in his inability to lead.
Second, what exactly is "extraordinary circumstances"? I ask because it isn’t defined. Is the hair standing up on the back of Robert Byrd’s neck enough of an "extreme circumstance" that he would launch into the fifth filibuster of his senate career? I have news for the readers: Because it isn’t defined it means whatever anyone wants it to mean, much like activist judges look at the "living" Constitution and determines it to mean what they want it to mean at that time.
And what is it with "good faith"? Are they saying they trust the Democrats? How foolish can one be. They’ve broken their word before, changed the rules when it suited them, and even laid low the majority party in power. That’s what being in the majority means. Sure the minority party fights you, but you’re still in the cat-bird seat. What the "seditious seven" did today was not only stab the party and the voters in the back, but they lit the Constitution on fire, and let it burn. Harry Reid is fond of pointing out how the likes of Rumsfeld, Bush, and Ashcroft shredded the Constitution, and there’s no evidence of it. Today’s grotesque and sickening display by these seven is clear evidence they just ran our founding document through the shredder.
Senator Warner’s happy expression as he showed the press this memo was reminiscent of Neville Chamberlain waving the non-aggression pact signed with Hitler, and proclaiming that "At last, we have peace in our time." Warner may think that he and his colleagues did was right, and averted a showdown that was likely to get messy, but it’s a walking cluster-f**k. (Pardon the language, but I’m still pretty ticked, and I’m tired to boot.)
And what happens to the other five? They get thrown overboard; sold out by the party they thought wanted them on the bench. Way to go guys. What a great way to show support for the president. And yes, I do think that McCain did this on purpose. I don’t have proof of it, and I’m not starting a rumor. Just call it a gut instinct.
So, we have our work cut out for us. As they just tossed five judges overboard, and the ability for the Senate to go back to the way it was, so shall we do that to them. I want them gone. And I join Ed Morrissey and Hugh Hewitt with the mantra that will haunt this party through 2006. NOT ONE MORE DIME. No further money goes to the GOP until I see a Supreme Court nominee ascend to the high court’s bench, and further I will be giving money to those I know I can trust directly. The party gets no more of my money or support. The NRSC doesn’t get a red cent, and neither do any of the "seditious seven", or Seven Dwarves, as Ed Morrissey has taken to calling them. And I second Ed’s call to rid the Senate of Frist’s leadership.
http://www.captainsquartersblog.com/mt/
When push came to shove, Frist ended up caving. He caved in letting these seven negotiate for us. (What a joke; you don’t send your seven most outspoken voices against the party to go and negotiate in favor of it.) Frist had all the kishkas in the world until these seven stepped in. He couldn’t keep them on a short leash, and he lost. We are returning to the status quo, once again.
I want Frist out of the leader’s position in the Senate, and any one of the seven that are up for reelection in 2006 I want ousted. McCain and Hagel, two possible presidential contenders for 2008 were just reelected in 2004, so they get to stay. Needless to say, McCain’s mine. He’s my embarrassment from the state of Arizona, and I’ll deal with him. Trust me, I’ll make sure he’s damaged goods before he gets to the primary trail.
"You done screwed the pooch this time, Johnny!"
Publius II
As many of you can guess, neither of us are happy over this move on the Constitutional Option. A deal was struck this afternoon, avoiding the impending showdown. But the deal isn’t a good one to be sure. (Hat-Tip to Hugh Hewitt for the memo; Bench Memos on NRO didn't want to load.)
http://hughhewitt.com/
And it reads as such:
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING ON JUDICIAL NOMINATIONS
We respect the diligent, conscientious efforts, to date, rendered to the Senate by Majority Leader Frist and Democratic Leader Reid. This memorandum confirms an understanding among the signatories, based upon mutual trust and confidence, related to pending and future judicial nominations in the 109th Congress.
This memorandum is in two parts. Part I relates to the currently pending judicial nominees; Part II relates to subsequent individual nominations to be made by the President and to be acted upon by the Senate’s Judiciary Committee.
We have agreed to the following:
Part I: Commitments on Pending Judicial Nominations
1) Votes for Certain Nominees. We will vote to invoke cloture on the following judicial nominees: Janice Rogers Brown (D.C. Circuit), William Pryor (11th Circuit), and Priscilla Owen (5th Circuit).
2) Status of Other Nominees. Signatories make no commitment to vote for or against cloture on the following judicial nominees: William Myers (9th Circuit) and Henry Saad (6th Circuit).
Part II: Commitments for Future Nominations
1) Future Nominations. Signatories will exercise their responsibilities under the Advice and Consent Clause of the United States Constitution in good faith. Nominees should only be filibustered under extraordinary circumstances, and each signatory must use his or her own discretion and judgment in determining whether such circumstances exist.
2) Rules Changes. In light of the spirit and continuing commitments made in this agreement, we commit to oppose the rules changes in the 109th Congress, which we understand to be any amendment to or interpretation of the Rules of the Senate that would force a vote on a judicial nomination by means other than unanimous consent or Rule XXII.
We believe that, under Article II, Section 2, of the United States Constitution, the word "Advice" speaks to consultation between the Senate and the President with regard to the use of the President’s power to make nominations. We encourage the Executive branch of government to consult with members of the Senate, both Democratic and Republican, prior to submitting a judicial nomination to the Senate for consideration.
This isn’t a deal. It’s political suicide, and the seven Republicans that concocted this cockamamie plan were: Sens. Mike DeWine of Ohio, Susan Collins of Maine, Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, Lincoln Chaffee of Rhode Island, John McCain of Arizona, John W. Warner of Virginia and Olympia J. Snowe of Maine.
So, here’s my take on this. First, these seven, which are sure to be hailed with accolades from the traitorous press, sold out five judges to make this deal. That isn’t how this should happen; all of them deserved an up-or-down vote. A compromise should have come in the form of pulling the trigger. I’m apt to wonder why Frist didn’t rein these seven in when the idea of them negotiating with the Democrats came up. These seven RINOs could barely be counted on for a half-way decent vote, and Frist allowed them to negotiate on behalf of the party. There’s my initial ire; I hold Frist culpable in this, but that comes in his inability to lead.
Second, what exactly is "extraordinary circumstances"? I ask because it isn’t defined. Is the hair standing up on the back of Robert Byrd’s neck enough of an "extreme circumstance" that he would launch into the fifth filibuster of his senate career? I have news for the readers: Because it isn’t defined it means whatever anyone wants it to mean, much like activist judges look at the "living" Constitution and determines it to mean what they want it to mean at that time.
And what is it with "good faith"? Are they saying they trust the Democrats? How foolish can one be. They’ve broken their word before, changed the rules when it suited them, and even laid low the majority party in power. That’s what being in the majority means. Sure the minority party fights you, but you’re still in the cat-bird seat. What the "seditious seven" did today was not only stab the party and the voters in the back, but they lit the Constitution on fire, and let it burn. Harry Reid is fond of pointing out how the likes of Rumsfeld, Bush, and Ashcroft shredded the Constitution, and there’s no evidence of it. Today’s grotesque and sickening display by these seven is clear evidence they just ran our founding document through the shredder.
Senator Warner’s happy expression as he showed the press this memo was reminiscent of Neville Chamberlain waving the non-aggression pact signed with Hitler, and proclaiming that "At last, we have peace in our time." Warner may think that he and his colleagues did was right, and averted a showdown that was likely to get messy, but it’s a walking cluster-f**k. (Pardon the language, but I’m still pretty ticked, and I’m tired to boot.)
And what happens to the other five? They get thrown overboard; sold out by the party they thought wanted them on the bench. Way to go guys. What a great way to show support for the president. And yes, I do think that McCain did this on purpose. I don’t have proof of it, and I’m not starting a rumor. Just call it a gut instinct.
So, we have our work cut out for us. As they just tossed five judges overboard, and the ability for the Senate to go back to the way it was, so shall we do that to them. I want them gone. And I join Ed Morrissey and Hugh Hewitt with the mantra that will haunt this party through 2006. NOT ONE MORE DIME. No further money goes to the GOP until I see a Supreme Court nominee ascend to the high court’s bench, and further I will be giving money to those I know I can trust directly. The party gets no more of my money or support. The NRSC doesn’t get a red cent, and neither do any of the "seditious seven", or Seven Dwarves, as Ed Morrissey has taken to calling them. And I second Ed’s call to rid the Senate of Frist’s leadership.
http://www.captainsquartersblog.com/mt/
When push came to shove, Frist ended up caving. He caved in letting these seven negotiate for us. (What a joke; you don’t send your seven most outspoken voices against the party to go and negotiate in favor of it.) Frist had all the kishkas in the world until these seven stepped in. He couldn’t keep them on a short leash, and he lost. We are returning to the status quo, once again.
I want Frist out of the leader’s position in the Senate, and any one of the seven that are up for reelection in 2006 I want ousted. McCain and Hagel, two possible presidential contenders for 2008 were just reelected in 2004, so they get to stay. Needless to say, McCain’s mine. He’s my embarrassment from the state of Arizona, and I’ll deal with him. Trust me, I’ll make sure he’s damaged goods before he gets to the primary trail.
"You done screwed the pooch this time, Johnny!"
Publius II
posted by Syd And Vaughn | 12:21 AM
4 Comments:
I'm seriously POed. Thanks for putting the 'agreement' up for all to see.
Why is it so hard for the Republican Party leadership to understand that this was never about votes for specific nominees.
This was about eliminating a minority party's ABUSE of the filibuster for political gain.
The fact that the Dem's WILL allow votes on the very same three nominees that they have been calling "extreme" for a week proves it.
The deal may also have a terrible unintended consequence, which I have noted here:
http://lesenfantterrible.blogspot.com/2005/05/if-there-is-to-be-any-bright-side-to.html
Dark days. McCain has sealed his fate.
Good blog. Rawriter joins the others at my disgust for this back room deal. I wonder what they were smoking.
Guys,
God only knows why these RINOs decided to abandon the party. There is a lot of speculation revolving around it. I am with Thomas on this that it does not matter what their reasons were. They were obviously faulty.
The simple fact of the matter, as Thomas will eloquently point out later tonight, that they disregarded the Constitution completely, and that there is no turning back.
Repercussions will follow; these seven will reap the whirlwind they wrought. And I shed no tears in losing the likes of the them and their ilk in the Senate.
If these people cannot be counted on to stand and defend the Constitution, then they shall reap what they sow.
Thomas and I will cut checks to the first people we see as viable candidates against these RINOs when their time comes up for reelection. We will not support them, and in the words of Ed Morrissey of Captain's Quarters: "Not one more dime" will be given to the NRSC so long as they support these people.
They don not stand for what we do, nor have they ever. It would be better for them to simply switch parties. At least we would know what we got when they arrived in the Senate.
Marcie
Post a Comment
<< Home