"Morning Glory and Evening Grace"
Today, Scottsdale, AZ welcomes the "King of the Blogosphere" Hugh Hewitt. Hugh is broadcasting live from Montero at West World, of which there will be a "Patriot Forum" after his show.
In the meantime, we're back on the Constitutional Issue, thanks to Hugh starting his show off on it.
http://hughhewitt.com/
Reid, today, took to the floor of the Senate in an effort to chastise the GOP leadership for being so "extreme" and just wanting to "provoke a fight" over the Constitutional Option. Reid doesn't get it. It's not over the Option itself; we're being forced to go to the last resort to break the unconstitutional filibusters that Reid's party has been perpetuating.
He is quick to highlight, once again, all the justices the Senate has approved, and points out that these ten jurists got "their votes" the last term. That's a lie. It's an outright lie. They were filibustered. Pryor, Brown, and Owens were all filibustered by the Democrats. They never received their proper, up-or-down majority vote. The Democrats are totally twisting the text of the Constitution, and the media is being a more than willing crony in their deception.
The negotiations going on between Republicans and Democrats are commendable, but they're pointless. No matter what deal is struck, the Democrats won't abide by their word. I have said it, Hugh has said it, Marcie has said it, and numerous other bloggers have said it; Reid offering to negotiate, and swearing to hold true to his word is like Lucy telling Charlie Brown she'll hold the football for him. If Frist buys this, he's a moron.
But it sure didn't sound like he was buying anything today. He took the floor after Reid was done making an @$$ of himself, and he was not happy. At times you could see the frustration the man is feeling right now. All he wants to do is give the president's nominees their proper vote.
After Frist came Byrd. When Byrd started to speak, I wanted to retch. This man has the utter audacity to state that the Democrats are following the Constitution. He demanded to know where the phrase "up-or-down vote" was within the Constitution. Fair enough. Senator, where is abortion in the Constitution. It's a retarded argument for this man to make; a clear sign that senility, or possibly dementia, may be setting in for Byrd. The phrase is nowhere to be found, however, Article II, Section 2, Clause 2 is specific in what role the Senate plays in this issue.
He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.
I have stated this before: "Advice" comes in committee; "Consent" comes on the floor of the Senate in a simple majority vote! The more this drags on, the angrier I'm getting. I can't continue to educate, and reducate people that don't get this concept. There are seven--count them, seven--instances where a "supermajority" is needed. Nominees have no such special rules.
The Hill reports that Frist is under fire from all sides, and murmurs coming from the Democrats show that regardless of who is presented first--Pryor, Brown, or Owens--they will filibuster. There's no reason to put this off any longer. Frist should pull the trigger first thing tomorrow. There's no reason to continue holding negotiations when we know the Democrats won't keep their word. The longer the debate goes on, the angrier the base is going to get. And in the meantime, good people and exceptional jurists are forced to sit and wait. They did this in the president's last term. And by now, if I were a nominee, I wouldn't be happy either.
It's a shame the USSC doesn't have the authority, a la Marbury v. Madison to rule on the Constitutionality of the Democrats' ploys. (Just kidding. I know it can't happen, but after reading the recent book I picked up on Scalia, I'd love to read his decision on such a move. I'm sure it would be particularly scathing.) Of course, were such a move made, I'm not sure I'd trust this Court to handle it properly.
Regardless, the Option needs to be done, and done so now. Let's end this already, and move these people to their proper places on the bench where they belong.
Publius II
Today, Scottsdale, AZ welcomes the "King of the Blogosphere" Hugh Hewitt. Hugh is broadcasting live from Montero at West World, of which there will be a "Patriot Forum" after his show.
In the meantime, we're back on the Constitutional Issue, thanks to Hugh starting his show off on it.
http://hughhewitt.com/
Reid, today, took to the floor of the Senate in an effort to chastise the GOP leadership for being so "extreme" and just wanting to "provoke a fight" over the Constitutional Option. Reid doesn't get it. It's not over the Option itself; we're being forced to go to the last resort to break the unconstitutional filibusters that Reid's party has been perpetuating.
He is quick to highlight, once again, all the justices the Senate has approved, and points out that these ten jurists got "their votes" the last term. That's a lie. It's an outright lie. They were filibustered. Pryor, Brown, and Owens were all filibustered by the Democrats. They never received their proper, up-or-down majority vote. The Democrats are totally twisting the text of the Constitution, and the media is being a more than willing crony in their deception.
The negotiations going on between Republicans and Democrats are commendable, but they're pointless. No matter what deal is struck, the Democrats won't abide by their word. I have said it, Hugh has said it, Marcie has said it, and numerous other bloggers have said it; Reid offering to negotiate, and swearing to hold true to his word is like Lucy telling Charlie Brown she'll hold the football for him. If Frist buys this, he's a moron.
But it sure didn't sound like he was buying anything today. He took the floor after Reid was done making an @$$ of himself, and he was not happy. At times you could see the frustration the man is feeling right now. All he wants to do is give the president's nominees their proper vote.
After Frist came Byrd. When Byrd started to speak, I wanted to retch. This man has the utter audacity to state that the Democrats are following the Constitution. He demanded to know where the phrase "up-or-down vote" was within the Constitution. Fair enough. Senator, where is abortion in the Constitution. It's a retarded argument for this man to make; a clear sign that senility, or possibly dementia, may be setting in for Byrd. The phrase is nowhere to be found, however, Article II, Section 2, Clause 2 is specific in what role the Senate plays in this issue.
He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.
I have stated this before: "Advice" comes in committee; "Consent" comes on the floor of the Senate in a simple majority vote! The more this drags on, the angrier I'm getting. I can't continue to educate, and reducate people that don't get this concept. There are seven--count them, seven--instances where a "supermajority" is needed. Nominees have no such special rules.
The Hill reports that Frist is under fire from all sides, and murmurs coming from the Democrats show that regardless of who is presented first--Pryor, Brown, or Owens--they will filibuster. There's no reason to put this off any longer. Frist should pull the trigger first thing tomorrow. There's no reason to continue holding negotiations when we know the Democrats won't keep their word. The longer the debate goes on, the angrier the base is going to get. And in the meantime, good people and exceptional jurists are forced to sit and wait. They did this in the president's last term. And by now, if I were a nominee, I wouldn't be happy either.
It's a shame the USSC doesn't have the authority, a la Marbury v. Madison to rule on the Constitutionality of the Democrats' ploys. (Just kidding. I know it can't happen, but after reading the recent book I picked up on Scalia, I'd love to read his decision on such a move. I'm sure it would be particularly scathing.) Of course, were such a move made, I'm not sure I'd trust this Court to handle it properly.
Regardless, the Option needs to be done, and done so now. Let's end this already, and move these people to their proper places on the bench where they belong.
Publius II
posted by Syd And Vaughn | 3:51 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home