Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Senate Confirms Bush Court Pick

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
Freddie Stubbs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-07-04 08:03 AM
Original message
Senate Confirms Bush Court Pick
By Elizabeth Shogren, Times Staff Writer


WASHINGTON — The Senate on Tuesday confirmed J. Leon Holmes to the U.S. District Court in Arkansas after an emotional debate over the nominee's positions on abortion, women's rights, race and separation of church and state.

Holmes, whose appointment was approved 51 to 46, faced intense criticism from Democrats and quiet disapproval from some Republicans. Holmes has said that "the wife is to subordinate herself to the husband" and asserted, when arguing against abortion, that conceptions from rape were as rare as "snowfall in Miami."

Six Democrats joined all but five Republicans in supporting Holmes' nomination. Holmes is the first of President Bush's most controversial judicial nominees to come to a floor vote in the Senate.

Sen. Patrick J. Leahy of Vermont, the top-ranking Democrat on the Judiciary Committee, called Holmes one of the most "intolerant" nominees ever considered by the Senate. He accused Bush of nominating someone who would pursue his antiabortion agenda and other conservative causes from the bench.

more: http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-judge7jul07,1,697141.story?coll=la-home-nation
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
DarkPhenyx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-07-04 08:11 AM
Response to Original message
1. Well, that is what Presidents tend to do.
Judicial appointments are made now days with an eye toward pushing forward their agenda long after they have left office. It is the way of the political world.

I don't blame, or even deride, Bush for doing this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tandot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-07-04 08:15 AM
Response to Original message
2. "the wife is to subordinate herself to the husband"
:puke:

I don't even know what to say about that. I am fuming :mad:

Another idiot who should have received the Darwin award BEFORE he was able to procreate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
C_eh_N_eh_D_eh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-07-04 08:28 AM
Response to Original message
3. Who were those six Democrats?
And will their security staff take bribes?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
graywarrior Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-07-04 08:37 AM
Response to Reply #3
4. Yeah, who are the 6 dems?
Edited on Wed Jul-07-04 08:37 AM by graywarrior
and why are they not republicans?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sendero Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-07-04 08:40 AM
Response to Reply #4
5. From the NYT...


"In addition to Senators Lincoln and Pryor, the Democrats who supported the nomination included Zell Miller of Georgia, Ben Nelson of Nebraska and John B. Breaux and Mary L. Landrieu, both of Louisiana."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gothmog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-07-04 08:47 AM
Response to Original message
6. Why was this idiot not filibustered??
Leon Holmes is an idiot and we had the votes to filibuster his nomination. Why was this nomination allowed to come up for a vote??

One reason could be that this guy is such an idiot that Senator Kerry can use him as an example. While this may be a valid reason, I would had preferred that the Democrats filibustered Holmes' nomination.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dansolo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-07-04 12:48 PM
Response to Reply #6
7. They were probably told not to filibuster
The spineless jokers in the DLC probably didn't want to have Bush be able to bring up the obstructionist canard.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
peterh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-07-04 01:04 PM
Response to Reply #6
8. Our distinguished minority leader cut a deal…
A while back….no more filibusters in return for no more recess appointments….x(

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A37694-2004May18.html

President, Senate Reach Pact on Judicial Nominations

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 18th 2024, 06:20 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC