AP: Frist, Reid Work on Judge-Approval Deal

[Synnical]

http://tinyurl.com/cqbon

By DAVID ESPO and JESSE J. HOLLAND, Associated Press Writers

WASHINGTON - In private talks with Majority Leader Bill Frist, the Senate's top Democrat has indicated a willingness to allow confirmation of at least two of President Bush's seven controversial appeals court nominees, but only as part of a broader compromise requiring Republicans to abandon threats to ban judicial filibusters, officials said Monday.

At the same time he offers to clear two nominees to the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals for approval, officials said Sen. Harry Reid (news, bio, voting record), D-Nev., wants a third appointee to be replaced by an alternative who is preferred by Michigan's two Democratic senators.

The officials spoke only on condition of anonymity, citing the confidential nature of the conversations between the two leaders.

Reid issued a statement during the day saying he has had numerous conversations with senators in both parties in hopes of avoiding a showdown. "As part of any resolution, the nuclear option must be off the table," the statement concluded, referring to the GOP threat of banning judicial filibusters.

[ProgressiveConn]

1. If Reid caves he needs to go as minority leader. nt

[Teaser]

11. This isn't caving.

We will maintain the right to filibuster future nominees.

C'mon people. Strategic thinking. Strategic thinking.

[Mass]

19. What is the point

to have the filibuster if we dont use it.

Next time they will do it again. I was sure something like that was going to happen when Biden talked yesterday.

[Pinboy]

115. As much as I love your posts...

this seems to be a more complex issue. As i said in post #109, I haven't looked at this in depth, but I have seen info that, because of an ongoing affirmative action case in the 6th circuit, dems were opposing any conservative nominee before the case was decided.

So the argument that, "If they weren't okay then, they're not okay now," doesn't apply.

[depakid]

25. it sure as hell IS caving

What passes for "strategic thinking" among Democrats these days amounts to nothing more than cowardice and sell out after sell out.

Reid has his chance to prove that he wasn't the utter and complete loser that his record shows so far that HE IS- and it looks like he's about to grasp defeat from the jaws of victory yet again.

He has one card- and one card only- that's to stand firm and deny the Republicans a quorum. He's made statements about it- let's see if he has the guts to back up what he says.

[renaissanceguy]

83. Exactly. There's no compromising this one.

If we cave in now, we'll cave in later, and then they'll win.

I hope he has the balls I thought he had.


http://www.cafepress.com/liberalissues.21272075

[Pinboy]

118. There may be other considerations,,,

See post #109

[Pinboy]

111. See post # 109

[DELUSIONAL]

42. If "people" believe this line they are SUCKERS

If the very worst of these judges are voted in with Reid's blessing -- and the stupid Dems keep saying -- "Reid is strong" -- then anyone who believes this line of bull dropping is a SUCKER.

Reid keeps pulling this crap and his vote record SUCKS -- big time. He is a phony.

Reid is a back stabbing Mormon. It was his church that helped kill the Equal Rights Amendment -- this guy is a wolf in sheep's clothing.

He is going to sell out the Dems -- especially if he allows the worst of the very worst Judge nominees put forth by the bushie/cheney/rove team.

Look at his voting record . . . .

[Tigress DEM]

59. We have gone from cowering in our blogs to being able to...

speak up in public about our truth because of Reid and other DEMS who have chosen their battles and fought them.

WHAT have YOU done for DEMS lately DELUSIONAL??

It may be good to watch Reid, but political war is as much about negotiating and getting the filibuster off the table is like coming to terms about nuclear disarmament.

If you can't see the benefit to that, then you are hopeless.

Also, there is a great wave of Republican bi-partisan moves that is sweeping through many issues. It could be that there is a lot of exchanging going on to get judicial appointments that will do the least damage in and that is on top of the filibuster being off the table.

It isn't a 100% win, but neither was all the fuss about those terrible nominations *ush pushed thru. Still, it's turning the tide and sometimes that doesn't happen in neat, we win - you lose packages.

[Pinboy]

113. See post # 109

[Sean Reynolds]

60. Bull!

If the Republicans had gone nuclear they would have written their suicide letter! The fact is, most Americans wouldn't support removing filibustering and the Republicans knew it. The problem here is that the Democrats didn't call their bluff and now the Republicans win!

Like always...because Democrats are too stupid to stand up to 'em.

[Tigress DEM]

63. Sorry if the filibuster got removed We the People got no say until 2006

They could do a lot of damage by then. Too much to repair.

What could the people do other than storm up to the steps of every capiptol and throw the bums physically out?

Without the filibuster there is 100% Republican Rule.

DEMS are smarter than you give credit.

[Sean Reynolds]

75. Keep telling yourself that.....

Then in two years we'll be faced with the exact same scenario and the Democrats will fold once again!

[Tigress DEM]

81. Being a pessimist is easy. If you're wrong, you can be happy....

If you're right, you get that warm fuzzy "I told you so" feeling.

I don't think this is a fold and keep folding scenario. I think this is gaining ground a bit and piece at a time, like in football. To me this is like a 3rd down with only one yard to make 10. Piece of cake.

What's the point? Moving forward.

Besides THIS particular thread is a post by the opposition admitting their own weakness. Could be Harry is even stronger than has been stated.

And compared to the bend over and get screwed mentallity they used to have the DEMS are showing a lot of grit and I support that.

You can do better? Fine. Get out there and do it.

[ProgressiveConn]

104. Not warm and fuzzy. =(

"If you're right, you get that warm fuzzy "I told you so" feeling."

No the result of seeing this crap before it happens is a cold pit in your stomach when it does and you couldn't do a damned thing about it. Trust me on this. =(

I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt until I'm proven wrong. But if he caves to pressure from the Fristists than he CANT be majority leader. I hope you can see this. This is called the nuclear option for a damned good reason. It is crossing the Rubicon. Anyone who still recognizes this regime as legitimate if they pull this crap is delusional.

[Tigress DEM]

105. But if this is what it takes to get the filibuster off the table....

I'm not saying the "regime" is "legitimate" but they still have the physical majority and we have to pull every string possible to overcome that...

We can't necessarily get what should happen to happen when dealing with these folks, but if we say, "All or nothing" and we get "nothing" we are worse off than before.

It is about staying alive and in the game to keep chipping away at it, to getting the public aware of what is truly going on.

It is terrible that we have to face these choices, if our opponents were honorable men, this would not be happening. But they are changing the rules constantly.

We have the Republican from Georgia telling Bush that Iraqi's believe the minority will be respected because they have the power of the filibuster to shame B*** into being a man and quiting this insane course of action for his party.

I truly think we are in a better place than we think we are.

Faith is believing in spite of the evidence.... and then watching the evidence change.

[autorank]

97. You're right. It could be positioning. Reid may know Frist will say NO.

Then Reid can say, Holy Cow, I offered a compromise and the sucka wouldn't take it.

Everything is not as it seems in the press. Don't start hanging people until you know they've really done what the CM (corporate media) says they've done.

Besides, if he gets a deal where 8 of 10 are dropped and 1 DEM choice is inserted, that's amazing -- they get two, we get one. What a humiliation of Frist by Reid.

My money is on Reid anticipating Frist being naive enough to go for broke. After all, Frist just spoke at the Sunday 'hate fest,' which indicates he's not showing much reality testing lately.

Give Reid the benefit of the doubt. Frist is playing checkers, Reid is playing chess.

[MontageOfFreedom]

107. This is a very bad deal and I certainly hope that no one.

Is going to ram through a judge who is being paid by ENRON, or works for the church or anything else for that matter.

[Pinboy]

116. See post #109

[okieinpain]

102. that's a lost art in this place.

[Pinboy]

109. That's only part of it

I saw an op-ed a couple of weeks ago (maybe LAT?) suggesting just such a compromise. It said some of the filibustered judges having conservative labels actually did issue decisions upholding the law and the Constitution which were contrary to their conservative views. The writer suggested that these judges merited approval.

Others have taken into account the fact that some 6th circuit nominees were opposed solely because, at the time, an affirmative action case was before the court, and dems opposed any addition of a conservative to the court before the case was concluded.

I confess that I have not studied these particular issues, but I think I certainly would before I would ever accuse dem Senators of caving in or selling out.

It seems to me that it is to everyone's advantage to avoid a bruising, partisan showdown on the 'nuclear option'.

[Tigress DEM]

129. Well stated. Thanks. If you could find that op-ed and share???

I need information before I make a decision. As much as I think the DU people are salt of the Earth most times, I still feel I have to have documentation for why I make my decisions.

Just a thing about me. I believe in what people say, but before I open my mouth to confirm I want the facts in hand.

[The Stranger]

121. They'll go nuclear then, and we won't have the polls with us then.

You need to think strategy.

[mmonk]

84. He's calling them on this

since this is nothing more than an attempt to force a filibuster to kill it so bush's supreme court nominees are rubber stamped.

[Boneman]

99. I agree 100%. I would rather lose all the judgeships than compromise

on any. The Democrats have the momentum from the Schiavo thing. If they lose it, they are done--and deserve to be.

[Pinboy]

112. See post # 109

Ed: spelling

[Inland]

2. Saving the filibuster for the supreme court nominees.

An understandable play. Would be worth it for the cost of two app.ct nominations/nutbags getting through.

[Mass]

31. If these appointees are admissible,

why were they filibustered? And if they were not, why are they cleared.

This way to negotiate is not understood by the public and it makes the Democrats look as political as the Republicans on this issue. Why cant they just stand on principle? If these judges were extremists yesterday, they are still today.

And it is absolutely stupid as the Democrats spent several months saying they would not move and now they are moving. Next will be Social Security, I imagine.

[renaissanceguy]

85. But what about when it comes to the Supreme Court nominations

and the repugs will (of course) threaten to end the filibuster then. And why wouldn't they...the Supreme Court is the final word of the judicial system. Don't kid yourselves--they wouldn't give up an opportunity to put their nutcases in there.



http://www.cafepress.com/liberalissues.21272075

[Me.]

3. Gosh, Frist Wanting To Deal When He "Has The Votes"?

The lying cat killer has blinked.

[wakeme2008]

7. Right he does not have the votes

but Reid will allow him to save face at a cost :evilgrin: I like Reid so far.

[Roland99]

8. You were believing Sonofabitch McConnell??

[Me.]

13. Not For A Second n/t

[Roland99]

17. I wouldn't trust him even holding a door open for me.

Look at some of his recent voting record:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=154x502

[Me.]

27. Not To Mention He & His Wife

have their noses so far up the rear of the Premier of China, it's why he looks cross-eyed.

[Pinboy]

117. WHO has the votes?

GOP is leaning heavily on on their wafflers. The end result remains in question. n

[MGKrebs]

4. Don't do it Harry.

I don't think we are asking for much by just asking for nominees who are one step closer to the mainstream. How friggin hard could it be for them to just withdraw the names and put up some others?

The minority party still represents a significant portion of Americans, some would say a majority of Americans. We DEMAND to be represented. This is not supposed to be an all or nothing type of government. It is proportional representation.

[Tigress DEM]

71. Thanks for disagreeing in a respectful manner, some people don't get that

this is supposed to be the party of tolerance and reasoned debate.

Tell Harry we support him going for more, I can work with.

People who resort to name calling and trashing DUers, I just don't understand.

[Psephos]

82. You've made good posts on this thread, Tigress

A voice of reason and respect is stronger than one that is shreiking. Sometimes, in the righteous heat of the moment, we can forget that.

Peace.

[Tigress DEM]

90. I'm angry and hopeful, but I agree that more can be done.

Still, it just feels like more like we are working together when we can enjoy minor victories for one moment before we realize there is so much farther to go.

I need the fun. This stuff gets way too heavy at times.

Still I hope I don't get too out of line to those that jump up and down, because there are times when it is good to jump up and down.

[Pinboy]

119. Buck up, Tigress...

Many here feel as you do. Hang in there -- and in HERE. Without you, and others who feel like you do, DU would be nothing,,,

Love & Peace, Pinboy

[Tigress DEM]

132. WOW.

Thanks. It means a lot.



May your world be truly wonderful and beautiful today and everyday!

[stray cat]

5. Dems won't win any converts if they shut down government.

It could be a decent deal by Reid - I'll withhold judgement and see how it turns our. I don't know anything about the 2 justices it might apply to.

[KittyWampus]

24. Plus, Democrats Have Gotten A Lot Of Good Mileage Out Of This Already.

[More Than A Feeling]

26. Pryor is up again, is he not?

Being only a recess appointment, he still needs to be confirmed, yes? And he has proven himself not to be completely nuts, with his ruling on the Terri Schiavo case (he was part of the Sixth circuit in Atlanta that heard it, right?) Perhapshe is the least objectionable, and might be one of the two in a deal.

[lala_rawraw]

79. No no no

Have you seen who these seven judges are? What compromise can be reached when one judge takes bribes from Halliburton and Enron, one judge thinks that gays should be executed... NO NO NO... there is no compromise on this. I am sorry, but you are talking about peoples' lives that these judges will affect on a daily basis, not some grand Dem political strategy. The people have been cast aside for a political war. Sorry but someone has to adhere to basic ethical standards. The numbers are against Frist in terms of public opinion. Even if they were not, it is better for the Dems to walk out for ethical reasons than compromise for political reasons.

[renaissanceguy]

86. These judges are in FOR LIFE, not for

just a few years. You let any of them in, and we'll have hell in this country for twenty or so years.



http://www.cafepress.com/liberalissues.21272075

[Amy6627]

6. NO! We can't compromise with these liars! They never live up

to their part of the bargain. They will just use the nuclear option threat whenever they can. WE DO NOT NEGOIATE WITH TERRORISTS!!! :mad:

[Tigress DEM]

65. Mellow Out. You'll blow a blood vessel.

Nobody sees the progress that happens slowly but surely as these things unfold.

Not everyone is a John Conyers voting for the right thing all the time, out there on the leading edge.

Harry Reid is cagey and in dealing with liars and cheats that is what we need to have right up against their deceit.

[lala_rawraw]

91. I know this, but

On this, no way. Sorry. NO WAY. Can you imagine one of these judges dealing with your case, should you be unfortunate enough to have to deal with them? Do you think that Reid dealing with crooks and liars will pop up in your mind when that happens? There is no compromise here. Sorry!

Feel free to tell me to chill out, I don't mind. Chilling is a good endeavor sometimes.

[Tigress DEM]

92. OK - List the judges and their worst offences and we can all ...

tell Harry Reid he has to do better. But the nature of the political beast is compromise and we have no idea what else is being negotiated.

reid.senate.gov/email_form.cfm

[lala_rawraw]

94. I am listing them in an article I am writing as we speak...

As for Reid, I have no right to tell him anything because my contact with him is in a professional context. It is up to you guys to tell him. I lose some of my citizen rights in order to communicate with some of these people. It sucks, but that is how it is.

[Tigress DEM]

96. reid.senate.gov/email_form.cfm

So, when we have the facts, we'll give Reid more ammo to fight. At least I will.

I believe you get a lot more response with a "Way to go, but I need a little more," than a "Hey, dork, what's your problem?" approach.

I'm sure there is a lot of room inbetween those two approaches as well. It's just I think a "Thank You" note is pulled faster than a complaint.

May just be my imagination too, but if I were working my butt off in the Senate, I'd like to know someone appreciated what I did even if I knew it wasn't as good as I could do because the times are absolutely insane.

Other than during the McCarthy era when have Democrats been subject to such insane scrutiny and Repugs given such carte blanche?

[lala_rawraw]

98. There is a great deal out there about them, even without me

Just google the judges, but there are 7 that are re-nominated and they are not worthy on any level.

[Tigress DEM]

128. How about just the names?

[Tigress DEM]

133. 3 of 7 in Post 127

* Priscilla Owen
5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans.

* William H. Pryor Jr.
11th Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta.

* Janice Rogers Brown
U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia.

[Tigress DEM]

93. Also, I'm a bit ignorant of the difference between ....

the Appealate Courts and the Supreme Court....

Do these people control appeals going to the Supreme Court? Or are they one stepping stone along the way to the Supreme Court?

Anybody know?

[ray of light]

9. Take action at the democracy cell project

I don't want Reid to compromise but there is a website that has all the numbers you can call to take action on any issue.

http://www.democracycellproject.net

The neoCONS are busy redialling their phones to make the nuclear option explode so we must not allow it to happen. Go to http://www.democracycellproject.net and spend time each day to save our country from facism

[Roland99]

10. Think our phone calls outnumbered the Fristians'?

[UCLA Dem]

12. smart man. save the real guns for the face-off over the supreme court.

[David Dunham]

14. Smart guy, Reid. We need to save filibuster for Supreme Court

[Placebo]

52. Bingo.

[lancdem]

69. I agree

[lala_rawraw]

77. Wrong.... this is not a test drive

These 7 judges will be dealing with real people and real issues. The SC is the final resting point... all the courts below that deal with life and death cases on a daily basis. Sorry, but you cannot play "compromise" with peoples' lives.

[renaissanceguy]

87. And what makes you think that we'll have the filibuster

for the Supreme Court? Come on, like the repugs would let us do THAT. After all, the Supreme Court is the final word in our judicial system. They wouldn't want a moderate/fair court to overturn their nutcase legislation.



http://www.cafepress.com/liberalissues.21272075

[Rowdyboy]

15. They publicly promise to abandon threat of "nuclear option" in return

for two lousy wingnut judges? Sounds like a deal I'd take in a heartbeat.

[MGKrebs]

22. Y'all are going to have to explain that to me.

What difference does it make when it happens? They go nuclear, we stop the Senate. Now or later. Same deal.

[Tigress DEM]

61. They go nuclear, we get nothing never again. Party over.

If we have no filibuster, they just vote straight party line and it's like a 10 year old playing football with 13 college grads. Smear time.

Their nuclear option also declares that their majority is good enough now and forever, so even though there are DEMS present, their objection noted, it makes no difference, repugs get whatever repugs want.....

But if they are ever taken out of power and wind up on the wrong end of their no filibuster rules then DEMS rule.

[renaissanceguy]

120. What makes you think they won't take away the

filibuster down the road? for Supreme Court nominations, or for certain legislation? Remember, THEY DON'T PLAY FAIR.


http://www.cafepress.com/liberalissues/588704

[Catt03]

29. I think I agree

2 are better than 7 and a compromise acceptable. Might just be good governing.

[Synnical]

41. Hmmm, Repuke promises? But, the 6th Circuit is interesting . . .

I've yet to make up my mind on this issue. The 6th Circuit is important. Seems Reid is only willing to give then two conservatives, and the court has four vacancies . . .

http://www.christiansciencemonitor.com/2005/0414/p01s02-uspo.html

from the April 14, 2005 edition

Conservatives near lock on US courts

Senators will consider new judicial nominees Thursday. GOP-appointed judges already control 10 of 13 appeals courts.

<snip>

Even if Republicans refrain from a nuclear option in these proceedings, legal analysts say the Bush administration is already accomplishing a significant shift within the federal judiciary. By winning a second term, he is well positioned to leave a presidential legacy that could take Democrats a decade or more to reverse.

<snip>

"As the Supreme Court's docket dwindles, the regional circuit courts become even more the Supreme Courts for their regions," says Carl Tobias of the University of Richmond School of Law.

Appeals court cases can be resolved in two ways. Three-judge panels decide the vast majority of federal appeals. But in certain cases, a panel decision can be further appealed to the full circuit court for so-called "en banc" review.

<snip>

The Democratic advantage in both the Second and Ninth Circuits appears secure, at least in the short term. There are no current vacancies in the Second Circuit and only four vacancies in the Ninth.

The Sixth Circuit is a different story. There are currently four vacancies, more than enough to swing the court solidly in a more conservative direction.

But there is more behind the 6-6 deadlock than concern about a possible ideological shift. Three of the four vacancies date from the Clinton presidency. Republican senators had stalled Clinton nominees, and now Senate Democrats are stalling Bush nominees.

And during this time, the Cincinnati-based court has become quite a battleground. In 2002, controversy arose over alleged manipulation of the composition of the court during an appeal involving affirmative-action programs at the University of Michigan. A petition seeking en banc review was allegedly kept secret by the chief judge at the time, who had been appointed by a Democrat, until two Republican-appointed judges took senior status, which made them ineligible to participate. (The appeals court subsequently voted 5 to 4 to uphold the affirmative-action plan.)

At the same time, Senate Democrats were reportedly being urged by one of the parties in the affirmative-action cases to postpone consideration of any Bush nominees for the Sixth Circuit until after the en banc decision. An internal 2002 memo to Sen. Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts says in part: "The thinking is that the current 6th Circuit will sustain the affirmative action program, but if a new judge with conservative views is confirmed before the case is decided, that new judge will be able, under 6th Circuit rules, to review the case and vote on it."

The Sixth Circuit episode illustrates how even a single appointment might help shape the course of US law.

[Mojambo]

16. Anyone remember when Chamberlain was making deals with Hitler?

It didn't really slow that guy down too much.

I'm not saying it's comparable, but when you're dealing with a political party that seems to have totalitarian aims it might be wise to remember history.

[femme.democratique]

50. VERY astute observation!

Yes, I wish these people would start playing hardball and realize they are facilitating the destruction of our country!

[Tigress DEM]

73. Nope, wasn't born yet.... will have to look it up.

Still, I think we are finding not every Republican wants to be seen as a Nazi, at least with 2006 so close on the horizon.

Don't you get the sense of the Republicans, the religious leaders (minus extermist fundies) and even some of the media distancing themselves from the putrid smell coming from this administration?

I think every negotiation will get better and I think there will be an overturn of parties in 2006 and 2008 - even if the machines malfunction.

[EST]

125. Again

[Tigress DEM]

130. Again ... What???

[moondust]

103. Same door, different dungeon.

Open it and there's no telling what sort of torture and tyranny you're in for--virtually without recourse.

Frist should be smart enough to know better than to do this. Four-year Presidential appointments are one thing. Lifelong judicial appointments are something else and "the other half" of the country deserves roughly half the power to approve or not approve them.

[Tigress DEM]

131. I think we all want the representation....

I think the focus IS on the Judicial appointments now, but come on... we had to stand up to Gonzales (ie Mr Torture Memo) as Attorney General just to make sure a formal protest was noted and we weren't looked upon as complicit in his actions.

That way when we get the bums out of office there will at least be the hope in the world that we'll get back to more normal, legal, ethical ways of doing things once the DEMS are in charge.

Judicial Appointments hurt OUR country and that is really, really important, but it's kinda of being selfish is we say screw the rest of the world we aren't even going to try on the appointments.

[Tandalayo_Scheisskopf]

18. This is a win.

Here's why:

WaPo poll out today:

Would you support or oppose changing the Senate rules to make it easier for the Republicans to confirm Bush's judicial nominees?

Support - 26%


Oppose - 66%

WaPo, people. WaPo.

[TankLV]

46. How is this in any way shape or form a "win" for dems?

We have over 2/3 of the country BEHIND US and we CAVE?!?!?!

How is this a friggin win?

We should stand FIRM.

These scumbag nominees were scumbags before, and suddenly they are acceptable now?!?!?!?!

It's always the same "save it for later" crap.

Well, spineless dems, IT'S "LATER" NOW!

This is a sellout, plain and simple.

We give in, and it's supposed to be a win?!?!?!

Give us a break!

[americanstranger]

54. Let 2 wingers in, and save the filibuster

for Supreme Court nominations?

Damn straight, it's a win.

And if the Repubs renege on the deal, every Dem running against a Republican leadership that can't honor a simple deal.

Really. It's simple, and it is a win.

-as

[MGKrebs]

62. Oh, that sounds like a great bargain.

They get two for-sure nominations through, and we get the CHANCE to TRY to CONVINCE republicans to not vote for Republicans.

[americanstranger]

72. Or what? they kill the filibuster, and

what do we have then? Even less.

Use your head.

-as

[regnaD kciN]

108. I agree. This is smart poker-playing...

...by the Senator from the gambling state.

The bottom line is to kill the elimination of the filibuster for the remainder of the term. By 1/2007, the Senate should be more favorable for us.

Lose the filibuster now, and Bush will stack SCOTUS with younger Scalia-clones before his term winds up, and a future Democratic President and Congress will be helpless to undo it.

Eyes on the prize, folks!

[Al-CIAda]

58. Dems taking a dive again. Welcome to fascism. n/t

[Rose Siding]

20. All this public approval has thrown poor Harry off his stride

The dems have an opportunity to champion a good thing that even Americans support, 2 to 1. DON'T let them see you cave!

You don't suppose it's the anti-choice judges Reid's bargaining for, do you?

[Kerrytravelers]

21. Question:

If we comprimise, will they consider their little "Just Us" Sunday a success? Will this lead to more? Will a compromise make us seem weak, instead of them looking like the bullies on the playground. When we start campaiging, will people ask why we sisn't stand strong against them?

I'm just throwing this out there. I know we gotta be strategic, but at what price and at what point does that place us in even more peril?

[Mass]

33. Totally weak!

and unprincipled, because if these judges were extremists yesterday, while are they not extremists today.

[Freedom_from_Chains]

23. No Deals!

Force the GOP's hand so people can get a good look at what a statist is.

[depakid]

28. All the usual apologists are on board

Is there ANY BATTLE that some of you won't rationalize a reason not to fight?

After years watching all of the apolgies for just about every single outrageous nominee, insane policy or stupid election "strategy," I swear this place must be filled to the brim with republican moles....

[David Dunham]

30. Repugs have the votes to kill the fillibuster, so we need a compromise

We wouldn't be able to hold the Dems to effectively shut down the Senate for weeks. The public would not tolerate that.

[Mass]

32. If they had the votes, they would not be negotiating.

They would kill the filibuster. We will see tomorrow what happens.

[David Dunham]

35. They are negotiating because public opinion is against them

They have the votes, but they don't have the public support to kill the fillibuster. On the other hand, if the Dems force a vote and shut down the Senate, the Dems will soon lose public support. That's why we need a compromise

[Mass]

40. They will not shut down the Senate

Durbin gave a great speech on the Senate floor today explaining that they would not shutdown the Senate but force the Democratic agenda on the floor so that their issues could be discussed.

As for the Republicans, when was the last time they wanted public support? They are only cattering to they base and their base supports them.

Bottom line, we look weak and unprincipled. We accept to vote on two judges that yesterday were simply extremists. This is very bad PR because the question is, when were we honests, when we refused to allow the vote or now?

[depakid]

34. Hooey

The Republicans shut down Congress- for much less and what repercussions did they suffer? None.

This is the kind of cowardly thinking ("oh, the public wouldn'y tolerate...blah...blah...blah...) that put the dems in this position in the first place.

Until it stops- until the Dems get serious and act boldly and decisively- they're never going to have any respect- from the right- OR the left.

And you know what- at this point- they don't deserve any.

[David Dunham]

36. You don't know the US public well. They prefer political compromises

[americanstranger]

55. You're kidding, right?

Ask Newt Gingrich if there were 'no repercussions.' Sheesh.

-as

[Name removed]

48. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Tigress DEM]

67. Or you could be a freeper trying to make something good look bad.

Just because someone has a different opinion than yours doesn't make them wrong or clueless.

If you were a little more polite, you might get a better response.

Democracy is about respecting other people. You don't like what the repugs are getting away with, ok. I hear you, but don't go making personal attacks on DEMS who disagree with you.

History will show what is correct and it's still better than it has been and probably going to get better by the day.

We still have to keep the heat on, but if we punish DEMS for doing their best and if you weren't on the Hill than you just don't know how hard these guys are fighting, then they will give up. Why bother if nothing short of 100% rule by DEMS equates to success in the eyes of the voters?

[Tigress DEM]

68. If you were saying, tell Harry to not give up, go for more....

it would have an entirely different connotation and I might be inclined to agree with you.

Maybe I will anyway, but I don't appreciate the attitude.

[lyonn]

57. This looks more like a win

than a weak compromise. In other words, Dems made them back down.

[Tigress DEM]

70. Speaking of apologies, why don't you apologize?

Are you portraying yourself as someone who believes in Democracy?

How do you KNOW what is right with such unscathing compromise that you can disrespect other people on the DU?

You sound more like the people we are up against than anyone who stops and thinks maybe there is a reason for what is going on and doesn't automatically trash every action by a DEM for not being LEFT enough.

If you are truly in the tolerant and intelligent party, then act like it. Show some respect and debate in reasonable tones.

I could be wrong, this could just be one of those issues that gets under your skin. Maybe you are usually reasonable.

[jmowreader]

37. If the "right" two judges are approved, this is a win for our side

This is a case of compromise--which is how you govern when you're an adult.

Catkiller and Bush get two out of their seven "controversial" nominees approved.

In exchange, we keep the filibuster--which, as many others have pointed out, is best reserved for Bush's Supreme Court pick.

Who are the right two judges? Anyone but Charles Pickering, William Pryor and Priscilla Owen.

[David Dunham]

39. Exactly right. We need to keep the fillibuster for US Supreme Court picks

[ClarkUSA]

38. Anonymous sources are the worst - are they GOP or Democratic, e.g.?

or are they from the White House?

[MGKrebs]

43. What compromise are you all talking about?

Does anyone actually believe that Bill Frist will...what, withdraw the other nominees? AND not use the nuclear option if he (or James Dobson) see fit? So is Harry Reid going to get a Senate rule passed that says Republicans cannot use the nuclear option?

What do we get out of this? From what info we have right now, they get two of the nominees through, and we get a promise from Bill Frist to not threaten us anymore. (For what, a week? )

The goal is to keep these wack jobs from getting LIFETIME appointments. Repubs will abandon the destruction of Social Security before they compromise on this fight.

A better "compromise" would be: If they are going to PROMISE to not use the nuclear option, we PROMISE to not torpedo any reasonable nominees they put forth.

[Bush_Eats_Beef]

44. Deal with Frist = Deal with the Devil.

This guy is WORSE than Bush will EVER be.

Bush is just a spoiled, pampered, arrogant rich kid.

Frist may very well be the AntiChrist.

[BurgherHoldtheLies]

51. A "Fristian Bargain"....

I wouldn't trust any deals from him.

[nashville_brook]

45. nominated -- this was on ATC tonight... possible compromise

Schumer, Cornyn on Senate Filibuster
All Things Considered, April 25, 2005 · Michele Norris talks with Sen. Charles Schumer (D-NY) and Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX) about the impending filibuster in the Senate over President Bush's nomination to the federal court of Judge Priscilla Owen and Judge Janice Rogers Brown.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4619029

___________________________________

don't know if the repubs are going for this. it is putting them off-message. the dems have to keep the balls in the air, somehow. reid probably has no idea how this will come out and he wouldn't be talking unless he had a handful of support from other high-ranking dems. at the very least, this little move makes the Just-Us Sunday look even more ridiculous.

[MGKrebs]

47. Oppo research:

I believe the only way they will really back down on these nominees is if we can make them. All of these nominees have already been rejected and they re-nominated them!

"Over the past 60 years, the Supreme Court has gradually shifted from its constitutional mandate of interpreting the law to actively legislating from the bench, bypassing the legitimate function of the Congress and state legislatures. The Supreme Court, urged on by the ACLU, the American Bar Association and other liberal special interest groups, has created many so-called "privacy rights" out of thin air and then mandated new social policies, such as the right to abortion, the right to homosexual sex, the right to publish pornography, as well as trampling on our First Amendment religious freedoms."

"This type of activism (indeed, judicial legislation) by unelected and unaccountable judges was never contemplated by our Founding Fathers, and its sorry legacy has weighed heavily on all of us concerned about sanctity of life and marriage, states' rights, separation of powers, and religious freedoms. The only way to reverse this unconstitutional and ungodly trend is to appoint judges whose judicial philosophy is the same as that intended by the Founding Fathers. Liberals, justifiably afraid of attempting such extreme social change through the legislative process, unabashedly oppose any change in the judicial juggernaut they have created to bypass the will of the majority. "

http://www.family.org/cforum/fosi/government/courts/supreme/a0035340.cfm


"hyp·o·crite -- n. One who pretends to be what he is not or to have principles or beliefs that he does not have

The Democrats' efforts to block President Bush's qualified judicial nominees are not only hypocritical but are examples of partisan politicking at its worst.

Republicans in the Senate are working to ensure that all of President Bush's judicial nominees receive a fair and final up-or-down vote. Despite Senate history and tradition, Democrats are aggressively trying to prevent qualified judges from receiving what's been afforded every judicial nominee for over 200 years."

http://www.gop.com/UpOrDownVote/

[Rose Siding]

49. This could be HOOEY. Reid was on a conf call with bloggers today...

snip>
I just got off a conference call with Senator Harry Reid, the Senate Democratic leader, and several Lefty bloggers. Senator Reid discussed Republican leader Senator Frist's threat of using the "nuclear option" -a phrase coined by Republicans- the elimination of the filibuster.

The most important statement from Reid, in my opinion, was that he believed that if Frist had the votes in the Senate to push the "nuclear" button, he would have done so TODAY. So when Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY), the GOP whip, claims that Frist has the votes for the "nuclear option," we should not believe him.

Apparently, there are a core of sane Republican Senators who realize the irreparable damage that would be caused by Frist's going "nuclear." These Republicans Senators appear to be Sens. McCain of Arizona, Chafee of RI, Snowe of Maine, Hagel of Nebraska, Collins of Maine, Sununu of New Hampshire, Smith of Oregon, Graham of South Carolina, Lugar of Indiana, Specter of Pennsylvania, Warner of Virginia.

As Democrats (or most of us anyway), there can be no doubt that we disagree much more than we agree with the above listed Republican Senators. But it would be wrong of us not to acknowledge and applaud the integrity, love of country and political courage these Senators are exhibiting in this situation. The political pressure they are facing must be enormous.

http://dailykos.com/storyonly/2005/4/25/133951/651

[KoKo]

64. I hope to hell it's Hooey, because some Dems are pissed over the

Bankruptcy bill and this would be the last straw. These "compromising" Dems are going to split the party and will never win again.

[reality based]

53. How will the Fristian Right deal with a compromise?

Will they start eating their own? If this is a moral issue how can their newly minted saints compromise? This deal might lead to an implosion or more likely cause Dobson to run for something.

[Al-CIAda]

56. Stealing defeat from the jaws of victory- AGAIN. Can't wait till they Cave

on Social Security.

Fucking useless POSs.

[creeksneakers2]

66. Brilliant tactical move

Frist just charged up the RW base. They told them this is an attack on religion. If Frist compromises, he's taking part in an attack on Religion. There would be boiling anger from the base. I don't see how Frist can back down now.

The moderates in the GOP won't vote for the rule change unless Frist tries everything to reach a compromise. Its likely if Frist turns this down, he's likely lose the rule change vote. That would be a disaster for the GOP.

Reid has been doing a great job. The Dems are fighting back at least some of the time now. I'm going to keep my faith in Reid.

[lala_rawraw]

74. Oh no... I just need a fucking

Moment to absorb this. I am writing an article on these seven judges and there is no compromise. Not one of them is fit to serve on any bench, let alone the SC. If this happens, I am sorry, but I walk from the party and as much as I hate to do that, I will. This is not about NeoCons Vs. Dems, this is about the Constitution and the rule of law.

I beg everyone to write to Reid and demand that he not compromise on this. PLEASEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

[renaissanceguy]

88. People, you NEED to check out the records of these judges.

They are no moderates. They are right wing NUTCASES.

Go to http://www.saveourcourts.org and look at the records of these nominees. YOU WILL BE SHOCKED.



http://www.cafepress.com/liberalissues.21272075

[Synnical]

89. Which seven judges?? n/t

[Javaman]

76. These are not normal times...

Ordinarily, I would be pissed that Reid is negotiating with frist over the filibuster issue, but the reality is, the repukes seem to have no problem with running all over the constitution, so with the compromise, two things are accomplished, 1) the filibuster stays in place while we as Dems weather this repuke storm. 2) the repukes are at fault, they don't have the votes and we have to make them save face, so that is a point in our column.

One would ask why negotiate in the first place? if they don't have the votes what's the point in meeting them halfway? Because they owe us one now, that's why. Regardless of what is said publicly, various unsaid deals are made beyond the ordinary.

Also I think frist believes he got himself in to far and couldn't pull back. What will be interesting is what is said as the reason the repukes why they are pulling back.

Even after his ridiculous sunday religious broadcast, this shows that frist is full of shit.

[DearAbby]

78. It is caving in...Frist does not have the votes, nor the backing to play

this hand...Reid needs to stick to his guns. None of those judges should get in via way of compromise. There is a reason they all had been rejected before.

[Strawman]

124. offer no compromise and watch Frist get the votes

this looks like a reasonably good deal. It kills the Brown and Owen nominations, which from what I read are the worst.

This deal is something Republican moderates can sign on to and it gives them a way out from backing the nuclear option. Moderate Republicans are the key to this vote. If Dems take the hardest possible line here, I think it's possible that enough of those moderates will reluctantly join the nuclear option camp. I think its a smart political move and it will isolate those who still want the nuclear option on the extreme right wing of the Republican party.

Reid has defined the middle ground here, framed the compromise, and given leverage to moderate Republicans within their party. Looks like a good move to me.

[many a good man]

80. Let me get this straight --

Huge majorities are against ending the filibuster AND they disapprove of Frist's religious pandering...and WE are going to compromise?

Public opinion will drown them-- they wouldn't dare to actually go for the nuclear option. We should let them shoot themselves among the non-fundy right and disappoint yet again their freaky fundy followers. Split off the fundy base and Republicans won't control a thing at any level in the federal govt.

On NBC News tonight some puke said these 10 judges are no more conservative than the Clinton judges they blocked. That's one frame that must not be allowed to stand. It should be used to illuminate the extremist agenda they are ramming down our throats.

[MGKrebs]

95. You've seen this other thread of course:

"The Republican National Committee (RNC) has resurrected a bill Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) sponsored when he was in the House more than 20 years ago that would have kept members of Congress out of the Social Security program.
...
In a statement scheduled for release today, the RNC blasts Reid for the 1983 bill. He sponsored it a few months after Congress passed legislation that required all members and other federal employees to join Social Security. Previously, federal employees, including lawmakers, participated in a generous defined-benefit pension program that exempted them from Social Security taxes."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x1422389

Frist negotiating in bad faith?

[DELUSIONAL]

100. Reid "fake phony Democrat"

which two are you going to let through???"


Thus is the question of Mike Malloy.

"Democrat leaders . . . that has turned tail and run. Oh my god, how disgusting."

Reid says, Oh O.K. I'll let two of these Communist rat eaters through.

Now I know why I love listening to Mike Malloy -- he puts words to my frustration with the Democratic leaders.

You can download tonight's show -- it is well worth listening to.

In the first hour Malloy took up the Jeff Gannon trips to the white house. That is also an hour worth listening to.

[w4rma]

101. If they are going to do this, then what good is the filibuster? Just let

the filibuster go and let go any illusion that the minority has *any* power.

[halobeam]

106. My eyes are tired.

I've read everything I could get my hands on. This includes everyone's opinions here. If I follow my gut, which is all I have, (cuz my brain's fried at this point from so much reading), I would have to say, let the theocrats dig themselves into an early grave NOW.

Why wait?

It's agony doing this piece by piece. Let their true colors show, and they will show. It's scary, it's actually quite sad there are people like this in our world, but the neighbors we have that aren't aware or accepting of what this party is doing to our country, MUST see them for who they are in order to wake up. America will NEVER be what it was unless they do, because they won't demand change until THEY SEE IT.

I say BRING IT ON. If we don't fight the dirty fight now, our children will have to. Don't they have enough crap to fix already?

On the other hand, my one brain cell left is whispering..."if they agree NOT to ban the filibuster for a specific period of time, then we could save our right to filibuster for the supreme court nominations, and take Reid's offer."

Why does that pesky brain cell ALWAYS SHOW UP!

[OETKB]

110. What is winning?.

If anyone here believes that the goal is to always win in government, we will always look at ourselves as losers. The kinds of change that supports our side in terms of what we believe is societal change, not governmental. Thomas Paine in "Common Sense" said society deals with our "wants" and government deals with our "wickedness." To deal with our wants a social movement is needed. It cannot be legislated.

<http://www.bartleby.com/133/1.html>

"SOME writers have so confounded society with government, as to leave little or no distinction between them; whereas they are not only different, but have different origins. Society is produced by our wants, and government by wickedness; the former promotes our happiness positively by uniting our affections, the latter negatively by restraining our vices. The one encourages intercourse, the other creates distinctions. The first is a patron, the last a punisher. 1
Society in every state is a blessing, but government even in its best state is but a necessary evil; in its worst state an intolerable one; for when we suffer, or are exposed to the same miseries by a government, which we might expect in a country without government, our calamity is heightened by reflecting that we furnish the means by which we suffer." Thomas Paine, "Common Sense," Chapter I

It also takes putting people into office who support those views to move legislation or appointments that are more favorable to our side. Otherwise the tools of minority rights must be used wisely. Slash and burn does not win too many points. In fact a peaceful firmness that prompts an antisocial response from the other side often brings positive change. People do not seem to know what to make right until they see what is wrong(The Civil Rights Movement, Vietnam War Resistance, and even Terri Schiavo are examples). Our fellow countrymen go no further legislatively than what is before them at the moment.

Our representative government is a frustrating business. Nobody is completely happy with the compromises that come out of it. The question is: Can we all live with it? It goes without saying that ideologues of either side in appointments are out and this is where the minority should use its advise and consent powers. As long as a judge is capable of listening, no matter what their personal beliefs, this is not a cause for rejection. Remember the shoe does move to the other foot eventually. We have to pick our fights carefully. It is not fair to portray compromise as "weakness." It happens to be the stuff of our democracy. If we preserve or restore some sense of "checks and balances," this is an important achievement.

[BreweryYardRat]

114. Guys, there are others who've said it better than I can...

TigressDEM, autorank, and Pinboy. Listen to them, they're making sense.

[The Stranger]

122. Catastrophic if he caves.

1. The Social Security privatization disaster is crashing and burning, even while that imbecile (Bush) is touring the country trying to save it.

2. Polls are showing that going nuclear would be very unpopular, and the Republicans were shying at the end of last week.

3. Teri Shiavo exposed real cracks between the fiscal conservatives and the neonazi/theonazicons, and it is spreading.

For Reid to even approach first, is a very severe error in judgment.

[CBHagman]

123. I've twice called Reid's office.

The first time was after hours and the mail box was full. The next time I called, I went right to hold.

Are all my fellow DUers busily calling Senator Reid? One can only hope...

Of course, a lot of those callers could be Frist-type maniacs.

[saracat]

126. Strategy, Smategy. This is CAVING.

It keeps being said, the Dems must "pick their battles" Well, what battles are worth fighting for? So far nothing has made the cut! There is drilling in Anwar and the Bancruptsy Bill passed. Reid is even talking a compromise on SS. Bush has gotten over 100% more of his judicial nominees cleared than Clinton ever did. It was all right to use the fillibuster against Clinton nominees but not Bush nominees? Give me a break. The repukes have nothing to complain about and we don't need to offer them a "deal". In fact, if we agree to not use the fillibuster, what good is having it? What exactly are we saving it for? It seems nothing is worth fighting for!Bush has gotten everyone he wanted, including Negroponte! If Bolton isn't confirmed , that will be due to the efforts of John Kerry , who funded a battle against a man he KNOWS from prior prosecution to be evil. Reid is doing nothing.

[Algorem]

127. "Seven Blocked Judicial Nominees"-Why'd Ass. Press put out as news?

Seven Blocked Judicial Nominees

By The Associated Press

April 26, 2005, 1:33 PM EDT


President Bush's seven blocked judicial nominees and the courts on which he would have them serve. All were nominated in Bush's first term and then renominated this year.

* Priscilla Owen, for the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans. Approved by the Senate Judiciary Committee, waiting on Senate vote. Democrats say the Texas Supreme Court justice is an ultraconservative activist and fault her rulings against consumers, working people and minors who want abortions. She was one of Bush's first judicial nominees after he won the White House.

* William H. Pryor Jr., for the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta. Bush gave the former Alabama attorney general a temporary recess appointment in 2004 and renominated him for a lifetime seat on the court. Awaiting action by the Senate Judiciary Committee. Democratic senators have objected to his comments and writings on abortion and homosexuality, which included a Supreme Court brief in a Texas sodomy case that likened homosexual acts to "prostitution, adultery, necrophilia, bestiality, possession of child pornography and even incest and pedophilia."

* Janice Rogers Brown, for the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia. Approved by the Judiciary Committee, awaiting vote by full Senate. Democrats say the California Supreme Court justice is a conservative judicial activist who ignores the law in favor of her own political views. They cite here support for limits on abortion rights and corporate liability and her opposition to affirmative action...