Despite Carpings To The Contrary, It Never Left The Table.
I picked this piece up from a very good friend, and fellow blogger. She is on top of things as recent events in the Senate unfold. (Yes, we are too, however, a new perspective might be needed in some respects. Thomas alluded to that this afternoon.)
http://journals.aol.com/republicanjen/RepublicanJen/entries/1478
The following comes from statements made by Frist yesterday on the floor of the Senate. For all those that have stood in opposition to Frist’s continued tenure as majority leader (Thomas and myself included) this is a welcome relief. Not that there was not hope, but this should reassure the base, for now, that he has not given up the fight.
"The purpose of the filibusters was not only to keep the President's nominees off the bench, it was to wrest effective control of the appointments process from the President. Anyone who did not pass the minority leadership's ideological litmus tests would be filibustered. (read abortion) That meant a minority would dictate who the President should appoint if he expected the nominee to get a confirmation vote. This was a power grab of unprecedented proportions. And with more filibusters threatened for this Congress, the power grab would become even bolder and more entrenched."
He is correct in this. The minority Democrats have a serious problem on their hands. They failed to defeat Bush in 2004, therefore, he gets the opportunity to appoint his nominees. Frist still stands behind that idea. He knows what was done to him and the party on Monday. Do I believe Frist was completely in the dark? No. He may not have known what his party members were truly discussing, but he knew they what they were doing; he just did not realize how extreme their move was until that pathetic news conference.
"Fundamental Constitutional principles were called into question. These included the separation of powers, checks and balances, the independence of the judiciary, and negation of the Senate's right to advise and consent. The minority claimed the right to impose a 60 vote threshold before a nominee could pass muster, for that is number needed to invoke cloture and break a filibuster. The Constitution doesn't say that. It only requires a majority to confirm. But for a minority spinning novel Constitutional theories, the real Constitution took a back seat."
Again, Frist is correct. The extra-governmental powers for the Senate may be spoken of in the Constitution. Both Houses have the right to create rules for themselves—to better handle the decisions they must deal with. However, those rules should never supersede the Constitution, which is precisely what the Democrats filibusters, and demands for a cloture vote, did.
"The Republican majority tried at first to invoke cloture on each of the nominees. But driven by the minority leadership, the filibusters proved resilient to cloture. Then, we introduced a filibuster reform proposal and took it through committee. But it died without action because it was sure to be filibustered itself. So, we turned to the voters, and the election strengthened our majority. But the minority ignored the election and dug in its heels."
The minority was not the only ones who dug in. The RINO minority in the Senate also dug in, and exploited a clearly obvious political opportunity for their own petty, selfish accolades. What those seven Republican senators did was not just stab the party in the back. They unzipped their flies, and urinated on the base. This was a clear-cut case of disrespect for the voters that put these people in office, and it is reprehensible. When they do come up for reelection, the voters need to deal with them in the same manner they handled us. Almost 60% of this nation was behind Frist, and his Constitutional Option; they knew that this fight was the one they were waiting for. The Republicans all campaigned on this issue—including the Shameful Seven. This was important enough for America to give the Republicans Bush back in the White House, and a greater majority in the Senate.
"The moment of truth was to have come on May 24. But action was preempted by an agreement between seven Republicans and seven Democrats to forestall use of the Constitutional option in exchange for confirmation votes on several nominees and a promise that filibusters would only be maintained in extraordinary circumstances. I was not a party to that agreement nor was the Republican Leadership. Now we move into a new and uncertain phase..."
It is not an "uncertain phase". The Democrats may have won the initial fight, but they painted themselves into a corner. If they filibuster when the majority believes it is not an extraordinary circumstance, then the Constitutional Option comes back on the table. And I’m glad he points out the fact that no one in the leadership was involved. However, it does beg the question of why he did not shut down those negotiations. As the leader of the Republicans in the Senate, those alternate negotiations should have been nixed immediately. The punishment for violating Frist’s command would have been the removal of chairmanships for any Republicans involved in those negotiations. If someone was not a chairman, then they are frozen out of anything dealing with party business, aside from voting. That means a removal from committees as well. Frist could have pulled it off, too. He is an eloquent speaker, and would have had no problem convincing the caucuses of pulling their positions from the committees.
"I am now hopeful but wary. As Ronald Reagan was fond to say, trust but verify. If nominees are confirmed and the sword of the filibuster is sheathed, then the Republican Leadership can be proud that its courage arrested a dangerous and destructive trend. If filibusters again erupt under circumstances other than extraordinary, we will put the Constitutional option back on the table and move to implement it."
I do hope the Democrats were taking careful notes on his words. Frist is serious. These nominees deserve their vote. I am as upset as anyone over the failure to gain cloture on Bolton, but we knew his was going to be an uphill fight. (If I were the president, over this upcoming congressional recess, I would make a recess appointment of Bolton to his position, and the Senate can continue debate with the 110th Congress takes session.) But on the subject of the judges, Frist needs to pull up another nominee, some like Myers, or Cavanaugh, in an effort to force the Democrats into another filibuster.
Thomas might be right. Maybe if the "just wobbly" senators see that they just got spit on, it might make them change their minds on voting for the Constitutional Option.
Regardless, if something is not done soon, the GOP may face a serious backlash in the removal of long-time senators from their positions, and either see Democrats take their place, or more right-leaning Republicans. I would vote for the latter, and Thomas and I both are supporting the latter when it comes to Chafee, Snowe, and DeWine. The moderates must go. They are giving up the farm to our ideological enemies.
The Bunny ;)
I picked this piece up from a very good friend, and fellow blogger. She is on top of things as recent events in the Senate unfold. (Yes, we are too, however, a new perspective might be needed in some respects. Thomas alluded to that this afternoon.)
http://journals.aol.com/republicanjen/RepublicanJen/entries/1478
The following comes from statements made by Frist yesterday on the floor of the Senate. For all those that have stood in opposition to Frist’s continued tenure as majority leader (Thomas and myself included) this is a welcome relief. Not that there was not hope, but this should reassure the base, for now, that he has not given up the fight.
"The purpose of the filibusters was not only to keep the President's nominees off the bench, it was to wrest effective control of the appointments process from the President. Anyone who did not pass the minority leadership's ideological litmus tests would be filibustered. (read abortion) That meant a minority would dictate who the President should appoint if he expected the nominee to get a confirmation vote. This was a power grab of unprecedented proportions. And with more filibusters threatened for this Congress, the power grab would become even bolder and more entrenched."
He is correct in this. The minority Democrats have a serious problem on their hands. They failed to defeat Bush in 2004, therefore, he gets the opportunity to appoint his nominees. Frist still stands behind that idea. He knows what was done to him and the party on Monday. Do I believe Frist was completely in the dark? No. He may not have known what his party members were truly discussing, but he knew they what they were doing; he just did not realize how extreme their move was until that pathetic news conference.
"Fundamental Constitutional principles were called into question. These included the separation of powers, checks and balances, the independence of the judiciary, and negation of the Senate's right to advise and consent. The minority claimed the right to impose a 60 vote threshold before a nominee could pass muster, for that is number needed to invoke cloture and break a filibuster. The Constitution doesn't say that. It only requires a majority to confirm. But for a minority spinning novel Constitutional theories, the real Constitution took a back seat."
Again, Frist is correct. The extra-governmental powers for the Senate may be spoken of in the Constitution. Both Houses have the right to create rules for themselves—to better handle the decisions they must deal with. However, those rules should never supersede the Constitution, which is precisely what the Democrats filibusters, and demands for a cloture vote, did.
"The Republican majority tried at first to invoke cloture on each of the nominees. But driven by the minority leadership, the filibusters proved resilient to cloture. Then, we introduced a filibuster reform proposal and took it through committee. But it died without action because it was sure to be filibustered itself. So, we turned to the voters, and the election strengthened our majority. But the minority ignored the election and dug in its heels."
The minority was not the only ones who dug in. The RINO minority in the Senate also dug in, and exploited a clearly obvious political opportunity for their own petty, selfish accolades. What those seven Republican senators did was not just stab the party in the back. They unzipped their flies, and urinated on the base. This was a clear-cut case of disrespect for the voters that put these people in office, and it is reprehensible. When they do come up for reelection, the voters need to deal with them in the same manner they handled us. Almost 60% of this nation was behind Frist, and his Constitutional Option; they knew that this fight was the one they were waiting for. The Republicans all campaigned on this issue—including the Shameful Seven. This was important enough for America to give the Republicans Bush back in the White House, and a greater majority in the Senate.
"The moment of truth was to have come on May 24. But action was preempted by an agreement between seven Republicans and seven Democrats to forestall use of the Constitutional option in exchange for confirmation votes on several nominees and a promise that filibusters would only be maintained in extraordinary circumstances. I was not a party to that agreement nor was the Republican Leadership. Now we move into a new and uncertain phase..."
It is not an "uncertain phase". The Democrats may have won the initial fight, but they painted themselves into a corner. If they filibuster when the majority believes it is not an extraordinary circumstance, then the Constitutional Option comes back on the table. And I’m glad he points out the fact that no one in the leadership was involved. However, it does beg the question of why he did not shut down those negotiations. As the leader of the Republicans in the Senate, those alternate negotiations should have been nixed immediately. The punishment for violating Frist’s command would have been the removal of chairmanships for any Republicans involved in those negotiations. If someone was not a chairman, then they are frozen out of anything dealing with party business, aside from voting. That means a removal from committees as well. Frist could have pulled it off, too. He is an eloquent speaker, and would have had no problem convincing the caucuses of pulling their positions from the committees.
"I am now hopeful but wary. As Ronald Reagan was fond to say, trust but verify. If nominees are confirmed and the sword of the filibuster is sheathed, then the Republican Leadership can be proud that its courage arrested a dangerous and destructive trend. If filibusters again erupt under circumstances other than extraordinary, we will put the Constitutional option back on the table and move to implement it."
I do hope the Democrats were taking careful notes on his words. Frist is serious. These nominees deserve their vote. I am as upset as anyone over the failure to gain cloture on Bolton, but we knew his was going to be an uphill fight. (If I were the president, over this upcoming congressional recess, I would make a recess appointment of Bolton to his position, and the Senate can continue debate with the 110th Congress takes session.) But on the subject of the judges, Frist needs to pull up another nominee, some like Myers, or Cavanaugh, in an effort to force the Democrats into another filibuster.
Thomas might be right. Maybe if the "just wobbly" senators see that they just got spit on, it might make them change their minds on voting for the Constitutional Option.
Regardless, if something is not done soon, the GOP may face a serious backlash in the removal of long-time senators from their positions, and either see Democrats take their place, or more right-leaning Republicans. I would vote for the latter, and Thomas and I both are supporting the latter when it comes to Chafee, Snowe, and DeWine. The moderates must go. They are giving up the farm to our ideological enemies.
The Bunny ;)
posted by Syd And Vaughn | 7:27 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home