Sen. Kerry calls for filibuster of Alito - Page 12

SuzeQuze · #**166** 01-31-2006, 12:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dissention

They didn't even have the 60 votes in the Senate today to stop a filibuster. They only had 58.

Does this means the Dems above wussed out for nothing?

dissention · #**167** 01-31-2006, 12:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SuzeQuze

Does this means the Dems above wussed out for nothing?

Pretty much. They could have followed through with a filibuster, but they didn't because they're spineless cowards.

SuzeQuze · #**168** 01-31-2006, 12:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dissention

Pretty much. They could have followed through with a filibuster, but they didn't because they're spineless cowards.

Clearly. I love how the righties are saying the Dems were "abusing" the filibuster. Hello? We just want answers and debate and not to push through a nominee with an obvious agenda that goes against the will of the majority of Americans. I can see how abusive that is.

Incidentally, one righty pundit said that Al Franken's USO appearances are a publicity stunt to counteract the perception that progressives are anti-troop.

stargazer99 · #**169** 01-31-2006, 12:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dissention

Pretty much. They could have followed through with a filibuster, but they didn't because they're spineless cowards.

Yep. And I am done with them.

I read a comment on Bob Fertik's blog that Obama spoke on the floor early yesterday, and said something to the effect that it was more important to win elections than vote against cloture? Does anyone know if that's true? Even though he did end up voting against cloture, he's disappointed me more than any of them. I actually had faith that he'd be a strong leader for the Dems. I was wrong.

dissention · #**170** 01-31-2006, 12:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stargazer99

Yep. And I am done with them.

I read a comment on Bob Fertik's blog that Obama spoke on the floor early yesterday, and said something to the effect that it was more important to win elections than vote against cloture? Does anyone know if that's true? Even though he did end up voting against cloture, he's disappointed me more than any of them. I actually had faith that he'd be a strong leader for the Dems. I was wrong.

I haven't heard about that particular speech, but I heard him speak yesterday referring to Democrats as "they" and saying that "they" haven't proved "their" case.

Funny thing is that I had him pegged from day one and have been saying it all along. If reading the Democratic Underground is any indication, people are finally starting to pick up on that self-serving prick, too.

estranged4life · #**171** 01-31-2006, 12:48 PM

Democrats are turning into Oklahoma Democrats (aka Republicans) in which they do not have any spine whatsoever.

God, I love it

ShangriLaTroubl · #**172** 01-31-2006, 01:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dissention

Pretty much. They could have followed through with a filibuster, but they didn't because they're spineless cowards.

You can only filibuster so much, eventually he's still going to get who he wants in..
Chris

ShangriLaTroubl · #**173** 01-31-2006, 01:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stargazer99

Yep. And I am done with them.

I read a comment on Bob Fertik's blog that Obama spoke on the floor early yesterday, and said something to the effect that it was more important to win elections than vote against cloture? Does anyone know if that's true? Even though he did end up voting against cloture, he's disappointed me more than any of them. I actually had faith that he'd be a strong leader for the Dems. I was wrong.

The problem I see with it is, just what he said. There comes a point when the Republicans have taken over for so long, you just have to settle for things sometimes in order to get what you want in the end. The Democrats will definetely win back some seats this year, and could likely take back the Senate by 06. When your hands are basically tied, I don't think it's always the best idea to do things that will jeopardize your future elections.
However where I think they went wrong on this one is--the majority of American voters don't even follow stuff like this...and it would have never affected them anyway.

SuzeQuze · #**174** 01-31-2006, 01:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ShangriLaTroubl

... However where I think they went wrong on this one is--the majority of American voters don't even follow stuff like this...and it would have never affected them anyway.

Exactly. I don't know why they thought a filibuster would hurt their election prospects.

estranged4life · #**175** 01-31-2006, 01:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ShangriLaTroubl

the majority of American voters don't even follow stuff like this

the local NBC affiliate had a recent "call-in" poll where 64% said they dont care whatsoever about Alito being nominated for the Supreme Court, 26% did care & 10% had no opinion.

Of those polled Gasoline prices & the War in Iraq were of more importance.

ShangriLaTroubl · #**176** 01-31-2006, 01:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SuzeQuze

Exactly. I don't know why they thought a filibuster would hurt their election prospects.

The only thing I could guess is it's just one more Republican talking point. In the elections, esp. the midterm elections being this year--I guess they figured Republicans would use it as saying Democrats don't want a majority vote in the Senate, don't want the Senate to be able to conduct business--etc etc

strandinthewind · #**177** 01-31-2006, 01:23 PM

The general public may be indifferent about the actual confirmation process, but they care greatly about the prospect of liberal judges as that term is defined by Rove. To prove my point, mention a candidate's support for abortion and gay rights (which is how the filibuster whould be portrated in Oct.) and you are demonized a la the D's in the last two elections.

SuzeQuze · #**178** 01-31-2006, 01:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

The general public may be indifferent about the actual confirmation process, but they care greatly about the prospect of liberal judges as that term is defined by Rove. To prove my point, mention a candidate's support for abortion and gay rights (which is how the filibuster whould be portrated in Oct.) and you are demonized a la the D's in the last two elections.

Right, somehow the right makes civil liberties appear ugly to some. Why people continue to believe talking points is beyond me.

strandinthewind · #**179** 01-31-2006, 01:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SuzeQuze

Right, somehow the right makes civil liberties appear ugly to some. Why people continue to believe talking points is beyond me.

If you want to fill your church - preach hate - sad but very true

I mean W was defeatable in 04, but fags and abortion loving liberals got in the say and people could not see past that. They would rather elect liars who go to war and kill innocent people than have them damn gays get to uppidy. It makes me sick.

dissention · #**180** 01-31-2006, 01:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ShangriLaTroubl

The only thing I could guess is it's just one more Republican talking point. In the elections, esp. the midterm elections being this year--I guess they figured Republicans would use it as saying Democrats don't want a majority vote in the Senate, don't want the Senate to be able to conduct business--etc etc

Midterm elections? Another joke. A couple of seats may change, but that's it. Democrats will not be regaining control of anything.