-
Despite the WaPost, Benghazi Is a Major Scandal
May 21, 2013 | 46 comments
-
Putting Heritage in DeMint Condition
May 10, 2013 | 57 comments
-
Military Might, Out of the Wilderness
May 8, 2013 | 115 comments
-
Not Wanting to Write About Nothing Good
April 30, 2013 | 126 comments
-
Perez Abomination Grows
April 23, 2013 | 81 comments
Streetcar Line
Filibuster Filigree
Crafting a fine approach to the Kagan nomination.
The Senate Judiciary Committee hearings have highlighted so many concerns about Solicitor General Elena Kagan’s record that senators should not vote to confirm her to the Supreme Court before giving their constituents a thorough opportunity to weigh in. It would be entirely consistent with past Republican positions, and not just defensible but highly advisable, for Republicans and moderate Democrats to announce a specifically time-limited filibuster of Ms. Kagan until after the August recess.
Republicans have never objected to a traditional, temporary filibuster of judicial nominees (or of anything else) used merely to buy more time for investigation and public discussion. What Republicans objected to, during the Bush administration, was the unprecedented (and, some would argue, unconstitutional) use of the filibuster to permanently kill a judicial nomination. The former approach is perfectly consistent with the duties of a deliberative legislative body, in a constitutional republic, charged with advising the executive branch about candidates for the third, co-equal branch of government. The latter approach, the filibuster used as a kill shot, is wholly alien to the spirit and structure of the Constitution.
What the would-be deliberators should do is this: Announce, right up front, that they will allow a vote in September, after at least three nights of prime-time debate that follow the August recess. They should say, though, that they will absolutely positively not allow a vote before then. The reasons for this approach are manifold.
First, Ms. Kagan’s thin record as a litigator and nonexistent judicial record makes it crucial to fully examine her lengthy record of political activism. The Judiciary Committee began her hearings this week after providing only weeks to review literally tens upon tens of thousands of pages of Kagan-related documents. Many of those pages have thus received only cursory review, if any review at all. The ones that have been reviewed, meanwhile, have already raised so many serious issues that they prove the value of fully examining all of them. Concurrently, another raft of documents has been entirely withheld due to unspecified “privacy” concerns. Senators under lock and key should have the opportunity to see — not for public consumption — whether those privacy concerns are legitimate. Not until senators have had time to fully examine the record should such an important nomination be voted on.
Second, Ms. Kagan’s youth — at age 50, she could serve for 30 or 35 years on the court if confirmed — makes this nomination one that the public should have ample time to consider. Last year’s town hall meetings on the health care bill proved that the public will step up, get involved, and air their thoughts in a productive way, if only they are given the chance. Town meetings are participatory, representative democracy at its finest. Senators should not vote on Kagan’s nomination until they can meet with their constituents, away from the Capitol Hill arm-twisting and insular echo chamber, and hear what those constituents think about this nominee. If, after all of that, senators still want to confirm her, her opponents should not stand in her way. After demanding a full, fair hearing, they should in turn allow a full, fair vote. But the latter should depend upon the former, the public hearing and response before the full and oh-so-final vote.
Already, plenty of good sources exist that provide comprehensive windows into what is already known about Kagan’s record. Ed Whelan at Bench Memos, Scotus Report, the Judicial Crisis Network, Shannen Coffin, and the Washington Times have removed a large portion of Kagan’s veil. What emerges is a picture of a crusader for partial birth abortion; for special legal privileges for homosexuals; for government limiting free speech rights by banning pamphlets, “redistributing expression” and “dol[ing] out” speech to “unskew” debate the government deems skewed; for limiting gun rights; for a massively government-centric philosophy; and for federal power so vast that the feds theoretically would have the power to force you to eat your veggies. And we know that she has expressed left-wing beliefs both on policy and on the (highly left-activist) role of judges, while putting transnationalism and foreign law above constitutional law.
All of this knowledge is, frankly, scary. Only ample time can give the senators, and the public, the opportunity to decide if, in total context, all of this evidence should disqualify Kagan from the high court. An up-or-down vote in September — but not before then — would allow both enough time to examine the record, and enough time after the vote for Kagan, if she is confirmed, to be seated on the high court in time for the new term that begins on the traditional “First Monday” in October.
Republicans showed in 2002 and 2004 that when judges become campaign issues, Republicans win. Despite GOP hand-wringing, evidence to the contrary is utterly nonexistent. Polls show that the public supports originalist approaches to judging rather than the “evolving Constitution” model. Polls show that the public, by outright majorities or solid pluralities, also approves of the usual policy results that happen to emerge from originalist procedures: against partial birth abortion, against government seizure of private property for other private use, against judicially imposed homosexual marriage, against handgun bans, against outright bans on all religious references in the public square, against race-based admissions and job promotions, against an ever-expansive federal government at the expense of the states, against bureaucratic overreach, and especially against coddling of criminals because of purely innocent procedural errors by police. These are issues Americans care about, and they are issues conservatives will always win on.
A time-limited filibuster will allow those issues to come to the fore, and smoke out Democrats who want to claim to be moderate. In doing so, it will pay heed to the American people’s desires, by giving them, in the most direct way constitutionally possible, a chance to shape the interpretation of this nation’s foundational document.
About the Author
Quin Hillyer is a senior editor of The American Spectator and a senior fellow at the Center for Individual Freedom. Follow him on Twitter @QuinHillyer.
Letter to the Editor View all comments (73) | Leave a comment
More Articles by Quin Hillyer
More Articles From Streetcar Line
http://spectator.org/archives/2010/07/01/filibuster-filigree
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
Current Issue
- Nuts to Nutter
- The Vast and the Tiny
- Ailes: A Voice for the Silent Majority
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
Melvin| 7.1.10 @ 7:24AM
The current Establishment Republican Leadership would never, ever allow constituents concerns to be of any concern to them.
The Republican Leadership views it's constituents as a bunch of illiterate in-bred savages just like the Democrats.
It is becoming painfully clear the Republicans and the RNC are banking on voters choosing them as the anti-Democrat, so that line of thinking gives them a physiological pass in not coming out with a plank of smaller government, reducing tax and the debt.
By the way has anyone noticed how the Republican Leadership has all but removed the message of repealing Obamacare? This is why the numbers are going down in the polls of Americans wanting to repeal it, just like Axlerod figured. Americans have extremely short attention spans, and the Republican leadership is playing right into it.
Kind of makes one think that they never did want it repealed in the first place. Their stratagem is, "Well, just tweak it when we're the majority."
Stephanie| 7.1.10 @ 8:17AM
I hear the minority leader John B. wants to, like you said, try to take the house on a wave of anti-dimocrat sentiment. Why not be proactive like Eric Cantor? Is that why the two are at odds with each other? I don't care if he's selling a book, just keep alive the massive take over of our health care system by roaming the country.
But you're right, there isn't much talk even on talk radio or FOX about repealing that monstrosity.
maverick muse| 7.1.10 @ 9:24AM
As ever, that leaves much talk up to the citizens to maintain in the public.
The Tea Party didn't have talk radio, FOX or MSM sponsors when Townhalls began. Conservative blogs reported what happened before joining in the public discussion foray.
What conservative actually expects respect from "the establishment" regardless of party affiliation? "Bureaucracy" was a dirty word in the 70s, and remains more so today as the federal bureaucracies multiply and mushroom while usurping powers most unconstitutionally.
Incumbent Republican promises to their constituents are only as valid as Obama's have been to this president's opponents. And it remains the constituents obligation to hammer home our demands that our government function legitimately as the Constitutional Republic which it is and is ours.
maverick muse| 7.1.10 @ 9:14AM
I agree with Michael Savage's analysis. America has effectively become a one party nation, despite facades or rhetoric before elections.
We're presently stuck between a rock and a hard spot.
Since the national polls clearly stipulate a huge conservative majority, electing Constitutional Conservatives is imperative. But just look at what's on the ballot to choose between. For instance, McCain's opponent J.D. Hayworth, and realize how frequently the "bipartisan" RINO unconstitutional legislation senator's opponent lacks credibility, having corrupted and gamed the system himself, sponsoring his own corrupt tax-loophole House legislation before losing his congressional seat to "fiscally responsible" Harry Mitchell (D). http://noblethinking.com/2010/.....ayworth-it’s-about-character/
Dixie Pixie| 7.1.10 @ 10:44AM
--- There is not a dimes worth of difference between the two party's.---
The question is why does the Republican Party leadership keep trying to prove that George Wallace was correct.
scotchieguy| 7.1.10 @ 7:34PM
You are wrong. But not by much. There definitely is a dime
's worth of difference between Libs and Repubs. The difference is, now dems are socialists, and repubs, are Mondale-style dems of the 70's. Seriously. JFK would be considered more conservative today than Bush. The scale have just slid to the left. Meanwhile, the masses are glued to Gilligan's Island re-runs, and the latest American Idol episode. And they vote... And you people really expect things to change in November.
Quartermaster| 7.1.10 @ 8:23PM
Federal prosecutors are out of control and desperately need to be throttled back. Alas, both parties are a problem here, just as with most everything else.
Gerald Stephens| 7.3.10 @ 7:19AM
Obama the White Man’s Fool -The Kagan Element
Obama’s background is totally void of evidence that his intellect is anything above average at best. He was merely a convenient shill drawn into a seriously elaborate ‘Manchurian Candidate’ attack on the United States, the Grand Bloodless Coup. The strategy required decades of exquisite, laborious, and detailed construction. The theory and ground work had been put in place over the span of generations. The plotters drew upon the best of the communist progressive theses available, Engel, Marx, Lenin, and the American contributor, Alinsky.
The final requirement was recruitment of a male person from an ethnic group within the country that would be easily and emotionally drawn to the group by the individual chosen. It is conceivable that Obama was identified and preened by his favorite communist uncle, then the early years further nurtured in a culture totally foreign to that of America. His college years are spent surrounded by communists, admittedly of interest to him.
A regular college credential being totally insufficient to his future role, he transferred or was more likely transferred to Columbia University. Again it is admitted that he ‘came’ under the influence of a serious lefty professor. Now, along with his minority status, he was inducted into Harvard Law School, an institution accepted by the general public as one of great stature, known to others as a harbor for radicals. A contemporary symbol of just how radical is found in the person of Ms. Kagan. Coincidence one might ask? Or part of the Manchurian effort?
Now the key inquiry is where are any prominent or even significant black people to be found in this fool’s past? Whitey’s hand is never absent in Obama’s accent. Communist radicals, corrupt politicians, union leaders and gangsters, are all white. They found and groomed the perfect ego, one to serve the essential purpose of whipping the minorities and liberals into a frenzy. Absolutely masterly!
Once in power they surrounded him with a few token blacks resembling the subservient Holder model. Even these were of such quality that they were rapidly identified as unfit to serve and driven out. Again it was a segment of the plan to demonstrate vicious white American racism unleashed against the first black president. Even his cherished black pastor was sacrificed. The score card shows that these vacancies were filled with more white radicals.
Kagan represent the ultimate anti-constitutional white radical infiltration of our republic. The mere suggestion of a life time appointment to the Supreme Court is in itself the ‘extraordinary circumstance’ triggering a relentless filibuster. Paraphrasing the deceased demigod, Ted Kennedy, there is no seat on the Supreme Court for E. Kagan who chokes over the existence of Human Rights, the eternal foundation of the constitution.
Alinsky advocated two principle tactics for the process of overthrowing government. The first was to convince the masses that the government’s prime objective was to keep them in a slave status. The second was to create chaos within the economy, culture, and government itself. Once accomplished the revolution would be easily fomented.
Question: Who thinks that Obama is in control of anything more than his dog?
Gerald Stephens
Hartford, CT
martin j smith| 7.1.10 @ 7:45AM
Trust BUT VERIFY. That should be the guiding principle behind a decision to support to turn down Kagan's nomination Even if this does happen and things according to plan,per the author and even if Kagan is turned down--Obama could nominate another "more qualified candidate " ( if you think there is no plan B you are foolish) one justas bad and more difficult to refuse approval.
This does not mean Kagan should be approved it means, be prepared !!!!!!!!!!!
PCC| 7.1.10 @ 8:13AM
It's bad enough that no one on the Court has seen active service in the military, but isn't the quota for unmarried, childless Justices full already?
buckeyeman| 7.1.10 @ 10:17AM
You forgot "lesbian".
Nick in Virginia| 7.1.10 @ 12:35PM
You mean "women who play softball", don't you?
U of A| 7.1.10 @ 12:56PM
No No not synonymous. Remember Jennie Fitch, Monica Abbott or Alyssa Hollowell? Softball players par excellance
Petronius| 7.1.10 @ 8:34AM
We who are civilized will soon face the full wrath of this government of the trash, by the trash, and for the trash.
Tom Poole| 7.1.10 @ 8:40AM
This article makes such good sense that the proposed 'time-out for thought' would never happen. But, in any case, I'm forwarding it to my Senators.
chris haynes| 7.1.10 @ 8:44AM
Kagan supports legal abortion, which means she holds that human beings that she decrees to be inferior can be killed by their superiors on a whim. She devised clever strategems to defend the barabaric partial birth abortion. A person of such depraved morality is unfit to hold any office whatsoever.
Our so called conservatives will give her a pass. while we are to respect them because they take a firm stand on the essentials, like captal gains and earmarks.
Rebecca| 7.1.10 @ 8:54AM
The partial birth abortion memo and admission of authorship would be reason enough to end her nomination.
It seems to be a tactic with liberals, to alter what experts say in order to achieve what they want: the oil drilling recommendations that Salazar doctored is another example.
We will be decades recovering from Mr. Blank Slate.
Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 7.1.10 @ 8:56AM
If any of the Republicans had any nerve they would have followed her joke about the hairstylist up with, "Those fetuses you endorsed aborting won't have to worry about having their hair done, will they?"
maverick muse| 7.1.10 @ 9:51AM
Rather, Republicans should not have guffawed at all, but booed or moaned at the Democratic rampaging ridicule of the formality of this entire circumstance meant for Kagan to explicate herself. She remains a SCOTUS lead balloon of a joke.
maverick muse| 7.1.10 @ 9:42AM
Of course filibuster!
But there aren't any "moderate Democrats" that a filibuster is going to expose to be any more disgusting that they've already proven to be, skunks that voted every unconstitutional legislative program advanced into law by Pres.Obama. Obama MUST stack the SCOTUS deck with Marxists in order to protect all of his Marxist laws and programs made into law.
FILIBUSTER KAGAN UNTIL AFTER THE NOV. ELECTION!
Our legislators have sworn to protect and uphold the Constitution. Kagan will dissolve it.
Our American public has already been proven in every recent national poll to be strongly conservative, not supporting Kagan.
Whatever feedback Republicans already have from their constituents regarding Kagan is already overwhelmingly antagonistic.
A temporary filibuster would merely be a feather in the neoconservative Republican Obama apologists' bonnet.
Any Republican voting to endorse Kagan MUST be removed from office by their constituents. Otherwise, blame the legislators' constituents and express disdain for them and their region. The leftists have certainly divided our nation already, depriving conservative regions of federal funds and federal support during crises. Obama has destroyed our nation's identity with our own motto: e pluribus unum. And Obama's Kagan will vote to enforce the dissolution of our Constitution and our national unity.
Margie| 7.1.10 @ 9:59AM
Quin,
Fantastic, excellent article! GOP~ ARE YOU LISTENING? Please GOP, do us all a favor and do what Quin suggests. How can you sit by and NOT? Please do not allow this horrible woman and I say horrible because of how she THINKS, become one of our Supreme court justices. We already know what she stands for and we don't want her! Please allow we the people to let you hear our voices at some town halls. We beg of you. We weep for our beloved country that is going over the edge of the cliff and we see it clearly unlike you perhaps because you all are so wrapped up in D.C. politics and don't "feel our pain". We're weary though we fight on but we are becoming weary with the constant barrage of Leftist policies and the taking over of the country by Socialism by a dictator who gets away with it.
Please, don't you know Senators and Congressmen, that you yourselves are being watched so to speak and we the people aren't going to re elect those who continue to constantly give in to these creatures who have no moral compass and who would be a "friend to him who destroys?" Prov. 18:9.
Our country is dying and you guys are the ones who God has you there for a reason and it is to do GOOD, seek justice, and to walk humbly with your God. Micah 6:8.
You guys are in the breach between us and the Leftists and we are counting on you.
Do the right thing. GOP. God bless you.
Al Adab| 7.1.10 @ 12:25PM
Margie,
Right on! Drag this out as long as possible. They just lost a vote with Byrd (RIP) and will lose many more in November. Whether we fillibuster or better still, Bork the (B) lady, after January 3rd this threat will disappear.
If this nominee represents their "best and brightest" we are in big trouble.
Margie| 7.1.10 @ 2:58PM
Bork her!! If only!!!!
Margie| 7.1.10 @ 2:58PM
Bork her!! If only!!!!
Al Adab| 7.1.10 @ 5:17PM
If only indeed. Where is the courage of our convicti0ns?
In re: our earlier conversation about Libertarians, they overlook one important fact.
G. Washington 1st innaugural 1789
"We ought to be no less persuaded that the propitious smiles of Heaven can never be expected on a nation that disregards the eternal rules of Order and Right which Heaven itself has ordained."
There is a moral order and we ignore it at our peril.
Margie| 7.1.10 @ 5:49PM
Al Adab,
You're awesome.
Al Adab| 7.1.10 @ 7:09PM
Margie,
I look forward to the day we meet if only on the streets of gold inside the western gate.
Margie| 7.1.10 @ 11:43PM
You better believe that I look forward to meeting you too, Al Adab. And George Washington too, in Heaven.
Mimi| 7.1.10 @ 10:44AM
Unfortunately, according to our laws, It is the Presidents job to appoint and the Senates job to confirm justices to the Supreme Court. I wish we could vote on this but it would take an Amendment of the Constitution. We can re-hash Nov. 2008 but what was done was done!! That doesn't mean the Repub's can't put up a good fight for our future, and I hope they have the guts to do it. If not they will face the voters angst at election time. Yes Quin, we need more time, this is too important..." Sweetie-Pie " isn't gonna cut it, and we can do better. The last pick said she was for gun-control.....Yea right!! Did she lie to the Senate? You-Betcha! We need " Honesty", " Honorable"...Stealth basic morality. Funny is'nt going to cut it boys! Show us who you really are...Elena Kagan or it's a NO-GO!!!
Margie| 7.1.10 @ 10:46AM
This just in: Elena Kagan demanded sex change operations be covered for Harvard students when she was Dean.
http://us1.campaign-archive.co.....b2bb222d2e
Northern Rebel| 7.1.10 @ 12:05PM
Never mind the Alamo.
Remember Bork.
Remember Jeff Sessions.
Remember the way the socialist democrats humiliate, and attempt to destroy the lives of nominees with whom they disagree with.
Remember the stonewalling of circuit judge nominees, until they quit in frustration, without a fair up or down vote.
Remember that if liberals lose control of the courts, they lose control of their agenda, because their destructive views will not pass a true vote, because their liberalism cannot compete with Constitutional conservatism, in the arena of ideas.
This is why they try to pack the court with enemies of freedom, and use thugs like ACORN to sully the ballot box.
Americans do not want to be Europe, or Cuba, or Venezuela. Democrats would be thrilled if our country was more like red China, and they could tell you how many children to have, or what kind of work is permissable for your class of citizen.
They think they are smarter and more sophisticated than us peasants.
So I say to you republicans:
FILIBUSTER!
FILIBUSTER!
FILIBUSTER!
FILIBUSTER!
You will be rewarded for your courage.
God bless America.
Louis Jenkins| 7.1.10 @ 12:13PM
Elaine Kagan is favor of abortion, partial abortion. No! Really! Filibuster? It sounds nice, but from the looks of things Kagan is now a shoe in. The Republican leadership has let us down (again). I'm beginning to wonder about the Republicans. Just whose side are they on? Next stop- immigration.
(Margie, you link didn't work for me.)
Margie| 7.1.10 @ 12:34PM
http://us1.campaign-archive.co.....b2bb222d2e
Oldefarte| 7.1.10 @ 2:27PM
Margie, As your link indicates, Kagan's nomination was intended for primarily one purpose. Since Obama is under heavy political pressure from the homosexual community, her placement is for a definite affirmative vote if/when any/all legal cases [ie DON'T ASK, homosexual marriage,etc] favorable to their cause comes before the SCOTUS. If you don't want your children, grandchildren etc subjected to a brainwashing agenda for homosexuality issues within their public schools [and textbooks], then I's strongly suggest that you contact your congressional representatives immediately and demand their voting against her confirmation. Surveys show that sadly respondents are FAVORABLE toward homosexual rights issues, but it's not about their rights but rather about their philosophies being brainwashed into school children's minds. Homosexuals will not be satisfied until their parading/propagating of their lifestyles has gained the public's preferences [over the hetersexual lifestyle]. They want/demand a CONVERSION to [not an ACKNOWLEDGEMENT of] their ways!!!!!
Margie| 7.1.10 @ 2:51PM
Thanks Oldefarte, I'll do that. And your last sentence says it all. The militant (and I know not all are NOT), Homosexuals, like the jihadits demand conversio, not acknowledgement. That is EXACTLY why the Left is so wrong. Wjile they accuse us of being that way~they are the epitome of "forcing their beliefs" on us!
The big question to them is: Why can't they live peacably and to themselves without having to destroy our deeply held values that are given to us by God. They want to be perverse? Go ahead, no one's stopping them. But why must they insist on destroying our country?
Tom| 7.1.10 @ 12:14PM
Unfortunately, everyone wishing the Republicans to force a wait until Sept. are kind of naive(sp). They will allow a vote on Kagan because the Dems will promise something or other, and the Reps will believe them. It's happened many times in the past. Then, Reps are upset when the Dems renege on the promises. But they never learn. These are supposed to be smart people. Even a three year old knows when he hears BS, but not our elected representatives. It's enough to make you cry. Frustration only goes so far. The populace is starting to wake up. Wouldn't be nice if the Rep party in Congress did?
Al Adab| 7.1.10 @ 12:18PM
Couldn't find a good place to jump in the string here. The only qualification The Left has for appointments is adherence to the catechism of their Faith. Experience, no. Rationality, no. Well the list goes on, but you get the idea.
Nothing must be allowed to interfer with the imposition of their alternate reality. Whether we plebs like it or not, these self-annointed elites know what is best for us. If that means self-government must vanish, then so be it.
That friends is how they think. They intend to crucify Liberty upon their twisted cross.
RCV| 7.1.10 @ 12:19PM
The Republicans in the Senate are on record that the use of the filibuster for judicial nominations is contrary to the Constitution, which they have asserted requires an up-or-down vote on judicial nominees. We'll see if their fidelity to constitutional principles is real.
JS| 7.1.10 @ 12:29PM
We're suppose to take your word for it? I doubt that troll. Show us in the Constitution (a document you hate) where it says that. I doubt you can.
RCV| 7.1.10 @ 1:40PM
I didn't say it was. I said that the Republicans in the Senate said it was, and they did, as a simple search of the news archives will prove.
And if you'd grow up and stop talking like a 7th Grader, people might treat you like an adult.
Al Adab| 7.1.10 @ 4:37PM
RCV:
Why is it you all (ya'll in Texan) keep wanting to couch this as between Republicans and Democrats? It was the Republicans- distinct from Conservatives- who failed and brought this mess on us.
This fight is not between Parties, factions as Madison called them, it is between those who love Liberty and those who adore central planning. Are the people free or must they comport themselves to the will of the controlers?
David| 7.1.10 @ 1:38PM
Maverick, if you want all repubs voting for Kagan to be removed from office, why would you not want them to vote BEFORE the Nov elections?
David| 7.1.10 @ 1:48PM
RCV, so did the dems give the repub nominees like Miguel Estrada and others up or down votes. If the dems want to play by and make up the rules as they go along when the repubs are in power, why shouldn't the repubs follow the same rules the dems used? Did you read Quinn's article, he said "temporary" filibuster, which he claims has been used in the past.
RCV| 7.1.10 @ 5:32PM
No they didn't, and it was outrageous, and I said so at the time. I've met Miquel Estrada, and he was eminently qualified for a judicial appointment and should have been confirmed.
roger | 7.1.10 @ 1:55PM
Is Kagan qualified to be a Supreme? Find out in this podcast: www.cashbeechcroft.podomatic.com
From a rising star in conservative talk radio.
DaveS| 7.1.10 @ 1:59PM
Like my father said, there are people on the wrong side of the substantive issues every time. I think Kagan is wrong on all the substantive issues. Her culture, the people she runs with and her environment trump any intellect she possesses that could allow her a reasoned and restrianed approach. Therefore, judge 'no'; advocate, 'yes.'
Nick| 7.1.10 @ 3:01PM
The KAGAN, as Solicitor General, argued for book banning in front of SCOTUS. She said Congress could ban political pamphlets and books.
She is unfit to be a county commissioner or sit on a town council, let alone be a Supreme Court justice.
Also, the KAGAN tried to claim, in her testimony, that when she banned military recruiters from Havard Law School, recruitment went up. So, in reality, she helped the military.
This would be like Adolph Eichmann claiming, during his Israeli trial, that the nazi persecution of the Jews had helped create the state of Israel.
Yes, it would be exactly like that.
FILIBUSTER HER!
Not "temporarily." Permanently.
Filibuster everything President Dither, San Fran Gran Nan, and Dusty Reid try to get passed.
BMorgan53| 7.1.10 @ 3:06PM
Harkening back to 2005, how is Elena Kegan any more more qualified for this position than say Harriet Miers was.
Now if the pink panty RINO's will kindly vote NO, it would be greatly appreciated
Northern Rebel| 7.1.10 @ 3:25PM
oldefarte:
I live in NY state, so I imagine my phone calls to my senators will do nothing but cost me money.
RCV:
You are absolutely right regarding the republican party's anthema concerning filibustering judicial nominees.
It can be frustrating to have scruples, sometimes.
The democrat party doesn't worry about constraining themselves in such a manner.
PCP Smoker| 7.1.10 @ 6:37PM
Will never happen Quinn, and I agree that it would a great idea. GOPers do not have the guts nor the intelligence for that type of tactics.
What will happen is that a conservative senator will float the idea, then McConnel and others will pillory him in the press causing to retract, apologize and vote for the lib.
PCC| 7.1.10 @ 7:14PM
I really don't see why so many of you oppose Ms. Kagan for the Supreme Court. She went to Harvard, didn't she?
Osamas Pajamas| 7.2.10 @ 12:19AM
Kagan on the armed private citizen? Know Kagan by her omissions, what she clearly could say --- but won't. She could declare her allegiance to the inalienable and perfectly-natural and universally-valid human rights of life, liberty, private property, and the pursuit of personal happiness.
The first article of private property is "the self" and all other rights are derivatives of and flow from these cardinal rights. These rights ----The Rights of Man ---- are the gift of nature or of nature's god ---- and they belong to all human beings, everywhere.
Among these inalienable rights is the absolute right of self-defense --- by armed, deadly force --- against any violators of the foregoing rights. Dictators prefer to strike against unarmed victims. It is the intent of the Second Amendment to make sure that any would-be dictators in America will very quickly find themselves looking at the business end of the privately-owned weapons of hundreds of millions of Americans. Get it?
Yosemeti Sam| 7.2.10 @ 1:26AM
Blah, blah, blah: this BHO soulmate baby
ass-kicker has shown her empathetic stripes - in her own handwriting.
Junk this carbon-based unit of un-Godliness.
Right Wing Patriot | 7.2.10 @ 5:01PM
The argument that the two parties have blended into one is valid. One could argue, there are still differences between current Republicans and Democrats. However, both have abandoned the core principles of the country by overspending and creating a massive, uncontrollable federal government. It this past year, it has become very clear that the American people strongly wish to pull the nation back to it's foundation and dismantle the machine that corrupt politicians have built. The question is: which party will listen to them?
Fist of the Fleet| 7.3.10 @ 10:16AM
The Republican Party needs a lot more work to do to secure my support. If they think the current situation is enough to sweep the house they are wrong. They need to show everyone the support for a strong economic platform, without that we will not regain our status in the world. Thanks to their showing in the last election the Supreme Court has an intellectually weak justice and we are on our way to having one who needs OJT. If that does not say it all, then what does. What has happened is that the party has blown its chance to set the social and business agenda for he next 30 years.
Speedypete| 7.4.10 @ 7:43AM
Elena Kagan. I can't say Judge Elena Kagan because she isn't one. What a smack down for all the district court and appellate court judges across the nation that have made decision after decision and written opinion after opinion. Why does no one in the media catch on? So very sad for those the watch main stream TV or read the major newspapers as their only source.
Right Wing Patriot | 7.4.10 @ 11:32PM
The main stream media has been a joke for a long time. Their pro-establishment position is more obvious then suddle. If the American people wish to stay informed, they have to go and find their own sources.
rehuole | 12.20.10 @ 7:45PM
Bradbury's stories - to me, anyway - have all centered around the folly of government and technology and people's misuse of both. Always thought he was a Classical Liberal by his writing - what is now refereed to as a Conservative today (or a Right Led Display Wing Nazi Fascist to the Scumbag Nutroot and MSNBC crowd) Led Display.
jakcy | 1.20.11 @ 2:11AM
To read your article!