Will you feel betrayed by the Democratic Party if there's no filibuster?

[wakemewhenitsover]

:hide: :hide: :hide: :hide: :hide: :hide: :hide: :hide: :hide: :hide: :hide: :hide:

And Senators hide behind the falsehood that there'd be a backlash?

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

1. Too late...

The Pink Tutu Gang has already betrayed us.

[lonestarnot]

61. Damn right we WILL be betrayed. At least Custer the dope made a

last stand. We are going to be watching as it all goes down in a big heap.

[Vidar]

2. yes

[Selatius]

3. It's almost a foregone conclusion there will be no filibuster

There isn't the willpower or the consensus among Senate Dems to sustain one, I believe. If I'm wrong, feel free to respond and correct me.

[wakemewhenitsover]

12. The Republicans have created an air of inevitability.

But it ain't necessarily so.

[Avalux]

56. Well, I heard an interview with Senator Leahy today -

He stated that Reid will make the decision on the filibuster - which sounds to me that whatever he decides, the rest will be behind him. Bill Nelson, a very conservative Dem, has announced he'll vote no. And - Leahy didn't seem very concerned about the nuclear option/rules change threat from Repugs. He said those in power don't follow the rules anyway, so it doesn't really matter.

I don't think it's a foregone conclusion by a long shot. We'll see. ;)

[mike_c]

4. again...?

Yes.

[flyarm]

5. yes and i will withold any contributions if they do not filibuster and

stick my kid with this sob for their lifetime!

i will hold them accountable!! with my checkbook!!

fly

[Erika]

21. Agreed 100%

They sign on to right wingers and I won't give them a cent.

[flyarm]

35. first of all the dems will say nothing about the voting machines,.

then we have jerks like lie ber man who do not represent our democratic values..then we have ben nelson..who just shits all over all those of us who have called and written him ..and he doesn't give a shit if he screws our kids and lets these monsters take our kids futures into full fledged fascism.i gave alot of money..alot to the dems last year..i would have gotten more bang for my buck giving it to my children..for down payments on a home..but i thought their future in this country was more important..well now i know i just pissed my money away..because there are dems who could give a rats ass about our american values..
i would have gotten more satisfaction burning the money and letting it blow in the wind..as with these voting machines here in fla..well we did not win a seat..not one..why? because the dems sat on their asses and did nothing about these damn machines..even when there were many of us begging them to go public..
we have dems down here who are running the party who scoff at the very idea that the machines are rigged..or even could have problems..well they are disgusted with those of us who fight for changes and reforms..they get mad at us..no matter how many articles , documents, exit polls..we show them.,.,they simply do not want to hear about it..

well i am turning a deaf ear on all the $$$$ calls i get daily ..until the dem party grows balls and stand for our vote..and stand up against this evil regime..and filibusters Alito..not one red cent will they get from me..as i now see it as a waste of money!

and please no one tell me do something..

i was a delegate, i went out for over a year, night after night educating and doing speeches, i worked 15-18 hrs a day at our kerry headquarters..i housed the kerry field rep for over 7 months in my home..i fed the kids who were all sent down here for kerry almost daily for months( alot of them!!)..i worked all 15 rallys we had here with the kerry campaign..i ran the vip security groups..and security in general.. of volunteers for the rallys and would be up all night getting the security clearences from the secret service..

i was a poll watcher for early vote and the general..

i gave parties for campaign donations constantly...and i co chaired a kerry meet up group for over 11 months! and i wrote a bi weekly article in local newspapers...and all the while i ran a large internet group who were working getting info out into cyber space..

i saw first hand that kerry won here..i know without a doubt he won here..but thats not what our machines counted..no siree!
well i will no longer do all the work and put up all the money to see it pissed in the wind...

if the dems do not filibuster..i am done..because it will make no difference..we will have a dictator..and we will have a supreme court that will let him do what ever he damn well likes..and i will not support that ..nor will i support those who allow it to be done to my children!

i feel this strongly about it..i have spent so many hours calling dems senators and congress people ..and written so many letters and had all my internet group's people sending the letters ...

if they choose to ignore our will..and if they do not represent us..then i am done ..
i will support murtha..and hackett..i will not support anyone who does not support my values..my American values!

every member of my family( male) has fought in uniform for our constitution..if it can so easily be crapped away by people who are supposed to be representing us..then i will fight back...and the first step is my check book!

ok ..i have been holding back that rant..rant over...but i say what i mean and i mean what i say!!

fly

:rant:

[cascadiance]

46. Donate to a "counter-DLC" organization instead...

like Moveon.org or Progressive Democrats of America, etc. that hopefully will wield significant enough special interest clout to counter the DLC's special interest clout in determining party policy. If you donate to the party itself, you lose any clout with the way campaign financing rules are architected today. If the Democratic Party dislikes themselves losing more and more money donations from its installed base, then they should look to changing the campaign finance rules like we would PREFER to have happen over having to donate to another special interest instead. Sometimes you have to play the hand you are dealt.

It should be made clear to the DNC and Democratic politicians that this is one issue that this special interest won't accept, which is not fillibustering this nominee.

[Dinger]

6. I Guess It's A Tossup Between Them (Senators) Or The Party

Not sure which one I'd be more pissed at. Don't want to bite off my nose to spite my face.

[liberalmike27]

7. Not so much.

But only if I could get a unitary vote against him.

[f-bush]

8. disappointed

but will still fight the liberal struggle!

[BigYawn]

9. No! because...

A filibuster should happen only when a non-qualified person is nominated
who is a well known party hack. Judge Alito is neither.

Civility dictates that the president's nominee be approved
unless the candidate is known to rule on ideology alone and
not the law as written. Unless I see evidenve that Alito has
ruled his ideology and not the prevailing law, he is legitimate.

Justice Ginsberg was approved by senate 97:3 inspite her background
as a ACLU lawyer.

[Dr Fate]

26. Sorry, lying and refusing to be truthful on issues= unqualified.

Justice Ginsberg was not appointed by the most dishonest, corrupt and unpopular President in ages either. She was not appointed to beef up the Unitary Executive.

Justice Ginsberg probably opposes the Alito/Rove take on the Unitary Executive...

Civility dictates that we oppose dishonest, extremist Judges who are appointed by and who would assist corrupt, power-mad presidents like Bush.

[BigYawn]

27. Which rulings by judge Alito do you consider extreme and dishonest?

Thank you in advance.

[Dr Fate]

28. He refused to discuss the issues that he was asked about.

A man who hides how he views the issues should not get a lifetime appointment.

And how 'bout the ruling where he did not recuse himself- was he not dishonest about all of that?

[BigYawn]

30. Yes, he should have recused himself on the Vanguard case,

however the legal opinion on that matter was inconclusive since
Alito was not a direct beneficiary of Vanguard corporation. He
was just a mutual fund owner, and his gain if any would be strictly
due to performance of the stock market and not profitability of
Vanguard corporation itself. If he owned the same type of mutual
fund in Fidelity for example, his gain/loss would be identical to
his Vanguard holdings, and thus his taking on the case involving
Vanguard made no difference.

But if I were in his shoes, I would have recused myself just to
avoid any implication of impropriety.

As for his answers to questions posed, he answered no less than
all 6 recent nominees. 60% of people polled favorable opinion of
Alito. So there you go.

Listen what do you expect shrub to nominate? Another like Ginsburg?
Of course not. If Alito is filibustered successfully, the next
nominee will be another clone of Alito. How long can democrats in
senate get away with filibustering you reckon? The media spin on
constant filibustering will hurt us for sure.

[Dr Fate]

33. I've already explained my simple criteria: No dishonest Judges.

And no one is asking for another Ginsberg, a best, we want a moderate like O'Connor.

[gumby]

29. What's the ACLU got to do with it?

Don't you like civil liberties? BTW, Hatch suggested Ginsberg to Clinton.

Alito has proven to be an ideological hack. Ever heard of 'unitary executive' crap?

Alito's hack record speaks for itself.

[BigYawn]

51. ACLU is hardly a RW organization.

Ofcourse Alito is an ideological hack. Did you seriously
expected shrub to nominate a progressive democrat? What
assures you that Alito replacement will be less radical?

Howe many filibusters will we need for the next 3 years?
Will the media have a field day painting democrats as
obstructionists?

Don't you think our main goal at this point should be to
win majority in congress? And hopedully White House in 2008?
Until that happens, there is no way to stop RW judges is it?

So why get sidetracked on Alito instead of concentrating on
issues which will win us votes such as high cost of health care,
obscene paychecks by CEO's, outsourcing of jobs, environmental
deregulations, taxcuts for the very very rich, etc.

[Tactical Progressive]

31. You're using the main right-wing talking point on this, BigYawn

Underlying everything to do with Bush's judicial nominations is the right-wing's insistence that Bush has the right to put anyone on the court that he wants, and unless the nominee is a known serial killer, then nobody has the right to deny Bush that appointment.

That's a level of dishonesty that only a Republican can aspire to. When Orrin Hatch (R-extreme hypocrite), head of the judiciary committee, was vetting Clinton's judicial nominees he had a system whereby a senator from a nominee's home state could 'pink slip' or block that nominee from even getting a hearing. In practice it effectively gave every Republican Senator the right to trump any Clinton judicial nominee. One Republican Senator could block a Clinton appointment.

When Bush was selected Hatch changed that rule. Now every Democratic Senator put together has no right to dispute a Bush nominee. Nothing like two opposite sets of rules to spell out Republican notions of fair and honest. The filibuster was made for exactly such levels of malfeasance in governance.

Dems should be pointing out Hatch's two-faced integrity over judicial nominees every single time Republicans say that Bush has the right to put whoever he wants on the court. A filibuster is a wholly proper response to that level of institutionalized Republican corruption, and that is how Dems should sell it.

Get a new playbook, BY.

[BigYawn]

37. Do you seriously think Alito replacement would be less RW?

And lets say Alito was successfully filibustered. Now we get
the next nominee, just as right wing, just as pro-corporations,
just as anti-abortion. Then we filibuster him/her again.

Don't you think the media will have a field day declaring democrats
as obstructionists?

IMHO, our winning issues are healthcare, jobs and environment. I do
not want democrats to get sidetracked on Alito.

[flyarm]

36. ahhh excuse me ..he swore he would recuse himself..and then didn't

he is a fascist! tell us what did he answer ?? what did alito say to tell you one thing about his ideology?? what do you know about him that you didn't before the hearing?? not a damn thing..other than he was well coached! and that he refused to answer one damn question asked of him by the dems!!

read this and tell me all about alito!!

http://www.crisispapers.org/essays6w/deathwish.htm

"Shallow Throat":
Do Dems Have a Death-Wish?

By Bernard Weiner
Co-Editor, The Crisis Papers
snip:

THE UNITARY DICTATORSHIP

"The reality they're missing is that Bush&Co. long ago declared war on our democratic institutions, and the liberals pretend that it never really happened. Bush&Co. have set themselves up as a dictatorship, where, under an extreme interpretation of 'the unitary executive' theory, the president can violate whatever laws he wishes whenever he wishes, totally negating the Legislative Branch's lawmaking and oversight powers, and the Judiciary's right to interpret what they're doing in light of the Constitution. Bush&Co. have been doing this in secret for years -- using the 'national security' dodge when carrying out and condoning torture, domestic spying on citizens' emails and phone calls and so on -- and now, thanks only to some whistleblower friends of mine inside the Administration, the whole rotten, stinking pile is out in the open.

"The issue is joined, and yet the Dems simply can't face that they're going to have to really fight for freedom and power, not just mouth the words. The Alito hearings were the perfect platform to make their points openly, and they dropped the ball."

"But they did ask Alito plenty of questions about presidential overreach," I responded. "It's not like they ignored the issue."

"Yeah, they asked some questions, a well-rehearsed Alito bobbed and weaved with platitudes, and then the Dems moved on to another line of questioning, as if each issue were equal and a perfectly normal difference of opinion.

"What you and your friends are failing to grasp is that this is THE issue of our time -- the amassing of total political and military power in the hands of a few dangerous, power-crazed officials down in a fantasy bunker. The result of this liberal denial has led to a withering away of other countervailing powers in our society, in the Judiciary, the Press, the Legislative branch. It happened in Germany in the '30s, and it is starting to happen here. If we don't stop them now, we may never have another good opportunity to do so."

[BigYawn]

40. Agreed on all your points but you missed my point, please see my

post above #37. Let's hope shrub will be limited to 2 judges
on SCOTUS, and be done with it. Now lets move on to issues
which could win us some more seats in congress. Unless we do
that, the repukes will keep appointing judges we hate till
dooms day.

[BigYawn]

55. Plz nobody forget....Bork was filibustered and we got SCALIA

Sorry put this post in wrong place. I have reposted it.

[wordpix2]

59. yeah, great nominees the Repugs put up- in the past, Congress put up

their own nominees for the court and the pres would agree ( or not) to Congress' candidates

[cascadiance]

44. Was Abe Fortas "unqualified"?

If not, then THEY STARTED IT! And we should be able to use the same strategy back to defeat this nominee. The fillibuster was created for a reason! The reason being is that there is a possibility that the majority of Senators don't in fact represent a majority of the people, which in fact IS the case at this time! The fillibuster was set up to prevent a majority in the Senate representing a minority of the people from stomping on the will of the minority in the Senate that might represent a majority of the people. In short it is a form of guarantee that the representation of a majority of the people in this country isn't stepped on! It's not a simple rule, but it is an avenue that is provided to help rectify extreme cases.

[BigYawn]

48. Do you recall what was the main argument for rejecting Abe Fortas?

[ieoeja]

53. According to Republicans...

According to Republicans they were hoping Nixon would win that year's presidential election so he could name a conservative chief justice instead. But you didn't ask "why". You asked what they used as an "argument for rejecting Fortas". To address that then:

1. He wasn't rejected. He was filibustered with 45 votes against cloture.

2. He was a political hack who continued consulting Johnson while sitting on the Supreme Court a la Scalia and Cheney.

3. He was paid exorbiant fees for speaking engagements while sitting on the Supreme Court.

[Roaming]

52. "They started it" is a reason for a filibuster?

I'm inclined to go with Big Yawn on this one; this is a waste of energy and resources and it won't get the party anywhere.

[ieoeja]

54. Reason, no.

Justification, yes.

Lest you forget, Republicans are now claiming that filibusters should only be allowed when fulfilling their legislative duties, not their advise and consent duties. But since Republicans filibustered Abe Fortas' appointment to be Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, then the precedence has been established (by them) that filibusters are permissible during advise and consent activites.

[alittlelark]

10. Nice fortune -telling

I'll feel betrayed when I am forced to jump. In the current evilpolitical climate - who knows?

[Beam Me Up]

11. "Betrayed" doesn't exactly express it. "Dismayed" to the point of

desperation would be more like it. Must we fight them these fascists ALONE?

[DELUSIONAL]

13. yes -- because then we'll know that the dem party is dead. gone.

It would be great drama if they did filibuster -- and some senators might gain National name recognition.

They really don't have anything to lose.

I like Will Pitt's request for all Dems to stand up and walk out. It would take real leadership for this to happen -- just a handful and then more would follow their example.

[Imagevision]

25. Dem Senators who don't support it should be replaced by another

Dem Senator come Nov. A walkout like William suggested is an excellant way to get a point across and we have more to gain then lose...that's for damn sure! what's to lose?

[Orangepeel]

14. I know there won't be a filibuster

they might try, just for show, but they don't have the votes to sustain it. Never did.

[Redneck Socialist]

15. Nah, because I never really expected that there would be one.

:shrug:

I'm pretty much a pessimist when it comes to things Democratic these days. At this point I'll be happy if most of the Dems simply vote against him.

[FloridaPat]

16. I gave up expecting much from the Democratic party 30 years ago.

[seabeyond]

17. if they filibuster, and everyone raves for a day, will you soon forget

once again the dems coming thru and start bashing the next day?

[hyphenate]

18. Not so much betrayed, but

very bitterly disappointed. And the names of the Dems who don't participate in the filibuster will be long remembered as rats in my book.

[Richard D]

19. Yes. They'll most likely . . .

. . . have lost me.

[ShockediSay]

20. I feel betrayed by no REAL Lobbyist Reforms Proposed, like

Brakes on Earmarks

Brakes on Lobbyist political campaign contributions (Look what CT did after its corrupt Repug Gov went up the river AFTER A CONCERTED EFFORT BY THE FORMER LT REPUG GOVERNOR TURNED GOVERNOR!!!)

Brakes on 'Ethics Committees' like the Foxes in the hen house. GIVE US REAL INDEPENDENT congressional ethics commissions.

[Dr Fate]

22. I just dont want any excuses one way or the other.

If they cant filibuster, well that really stinks- but I dont need to hear any excuses.

Had it up to here with excuses.

A failure to filibuster says to me:

"We dont listen to you silly radicals who fund & man our campaigns and local parties."

It will be a huge let down- I'm hoping for the best.

[tyedyeto]

23. Betrayed? Maybe. Let down? Definitely.

Alito is someone who believes in more power to the executive branch of gov't. There is too much power there already, why give them more?

[Straight Shooter]

24. Yes.

It's like all our efforts are going toward pushing a mudslide uphill.

[PeachyDem88]

32. That's it, everyone...

Don't give the Democratic party another dime!

That way, the Republicans can out raise them 3-to-1 instead of 2-to-1.

Challenge cowardly incumbent Democrats in the primaries!

That way, what little money the party has will be used to attack the eventual Democratic candidate.

Join a third party!

That way, the Republicans will win close races all over the country... The same way Conservatives won last night's election in Canada, because the center-left vote was split between the Liberals and the NDP... The same way conservatives won the election in Germany, because the center-left vote was split between the social democrats and Die Linke.

And, once the Republicans have won election after election, there will be more Republican nominees for us to be angry about!

The Democratic party is dead, anyway. Right? Right?

:sarcasm:

*Runs, Hides*

[Protagoras]

34. I've felt betrayed for a long time.

But I won't let the bastards win. It is OUR party...the DINOs are squatters and my mission is to kick their ass out. I want my part back for Democrats. And I'll fight for it. No filibuster is just another in a long line of letdowns. But that means I know I have enemies both distance and close. That doesn't mean, however, that we don't have friends.

DK and JC speak well for me.

[Coexist]

38. Yes, I would n/t

[in_cog_ni_to]

39. I'll feel MORE betrayed. Yes.

:grr:

[understandinglife]

41. yes.

Peace.

[spuddonna]

42. Yes, I will feel betrayed! It's time to stand up! Filibuster!! n/t

[mmonk]

43. yes

if they don't at least try for one. I wouldn't call it a feeling but more of a truth.

[Cleita]

45. Sadly yes and I think Alito is a done deal.

Hopefully, in the future, these rogue Judges may be removed from office in other ways. It's going to take a Democratic government though to launch investigations and get the ball rolling.

[BigYawn]

49. It's going to take MAJORITY in congress to stop RW judges.....

everything else is spitting in the wind.

[AbbyR]

47. Yes, and no more $$$ from me

I make very little, but donated regularly to Democrat candidates, especially since Bush came on the scene. No more. If they can't stand up to the majority and filibuster, they have seen the last of my money, such as it is. I can't bring myself to vote against them - I could never vote for a repub, but given the opportunity to vote for another Democrat against those now in the Senate, I sure will.

[ieoeja]

50. No n/t

[BigYawn]

57. Was Bork filibustered and we ended up with SCALIA?

Atleast that is what I remember.

Our problem is not Alito. We can filibuster him, then we get
Alito II. Our problem is MINORITY status in congress and no
White House.

We can filibuster and filibuster, but can we do that for THREE
years left on shrub's watch? Will the media label us obstructionists?
Will the voters buy that argument? I am afraid so.

So instead of wasting our energies and brain power on Alito mess,
would it better directed at picking out issues which could win votes
in November? YES!! There are many winning issues out there IMO.
We need to use our time and energy in communicating those winning
issues to anyone we can get hold off including letters to editors,
flyers to voters and all the other usual stuff.

Otherwise get ready for a non-ending stream of Alito clones.

[wordpix2]

58. YES!!! If Dems are going to be heard, let's HEAR THEM! *lite is stupid

See how fast Dem senators are voted in again if they go BushLite.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

60. Naah. Just "politics as usual" by the "not as bad" party.

I will be pleasantly shocked if they should find the courage to do something other than wringing their hands and making the usual excuses.