jefferson_dem
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Apr-25-05 03:40 PM
Original message |
WaPo / ABCNEWS Poll : Sixty Percent Side With Dems on Judicial Nominations |
|
Edited on Mon Apr-25-05 03:40 PM by jefferson_dem
WASHPOST /ABCNEWS poll finds 60% of Americans side with Dems in saying Senate rules shouldn't be changed to make it easier to confirm Bush's judicial nominations.
Sludge reporting. No link yet.
|
Renew Deal
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Apr-25-05 03:40 PM
Response to Original message |
|
It's just a dumb thing to do.
|
Atman
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Apr-25-05 03:49 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
3. It isn't a dumb thing to do at all...if you're them |
|
Remember, these appointments are for life. The republicans may well realize it will cost them points, politically. But what will we be able to do afterwards? Re-instate the filibuster rule should we ever regain power? Sure, plausible. But you're smokin' too much weed if you think that would also come with a removal of the judges the rights appoint. They'll still be there to rubber stamp any crazy-ass legislation the republicans can funnel to them for review.
It's a kind of sacrifice fly.
|
nadinbrzezinski
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Apr-25-05 04:24 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
6. They are over reaching |
The_Casual_Observer
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Apr-25-05 03:49 PM
Response to Original message |
2. Where would it stop? You know they would change the rules |
|
to suit them from then on. The last time they changed the rules, bush steam rolled a war right through within weeks of the change, the ink wasn't even dry and the bastard was marching into Iraq.
|
ThumperDumper
(368 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Apr-25-05 03:56 PM
Response to Original message |
4. It should be 70% because |
|
you can always count on 30% of the population to be the "brainwashed segment" who'll go along with the Republicans on ANYTHING.
All the looney poles always had 30% for Bush. (30% thought Bush won the first debate, remember?)
30% would have voted for Bush if he had killed and ate a child on National TV.
Were 10% "Undecided" or something?
|
Still_Loves_John
(688 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Apr-25-05 04:05 PM
Response to Reply #4 |
|
there are a few people who have genuine problems with the fillibuster in general--things that go beyond the short-sighted Republican thing going on. They probably don't make up ten percet of the population though, so I dunno.
|
BurgherHoldtheLies
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Apr-25-05 04:33 PM
Response to Original message |
7. Fristian Bargain: a new term |
|
Frist traded his soul to the devil in exchange for political power. To “strike a Fristian bargain” is to be willing to sacrifice anything to the Rapturist Right of the Republican Party to satisfy a limitless desire for power.
|
grooch
(6 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Apr-25-05 04:38 PM
Response to Original message |
|
is that if they axe the fillibuster and the media starts trumpeting all the conservative judges getting in, there will be enough of a backlash that the theocons will get their heads handed to them come 2006.
I just hope it's not too late by then to undo whatever damage is done to the judiciary.
|
BurgherHoldtheLies
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Apr-25-05 04:43 PM
Response to Reply #8 |
9. Wall street/business donations will dry up |
|
Axe the filibuster, all other Senate business grinds to a halt, including all corporate legislation.
Frist needs to ask himself if it is really worth risking this for 10 measly radical judges?!?!?!
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Mon May 06th 2024, 03:49 AM
Response to Original message |