Friday, April 28, 2006
Judicial Nuclear Option?
Robert Novak writes that the hold Democrats in the Judiciary Committee placed on Brett Kavanaugh's nomination on Thursday may be the start of an attempted filibuster by the Democrats. He writes:
"Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid will come under heavy pressure to conduct a filibuster.
"Assuming that Republicans cannot get the 60 votes needed for cloture, Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist then intends to invoke the so-called nuclear option to confirm Kavanaugh by a majority vote. The showdown is expected within the next month. The same procedure may be used to try to confirm U.S. District Judge Terrence W. Boyle, whose appeals court nomination has been on the Senate floor for a year."
"Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid will come under heavy pressure to conduct a filibuster.
"Assuming that Republicans cannot get the 60 votes needed for cloture, Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist then intends to invoke the so-called nuclear option to confirm Kavanaugh by a majority vote. The showdown is expected within the next month. The same procedure may be used to try to confirm U.S. District Judge Terrence W. Boyle, whose appeals court nomination has been on the Senate floor for a year."
Comments:
Links to this post:
<< Home
I think people here are misunderstanding how influential judges really are. If “the people” really want something, they will get it. Judges will not be able to stand in the way.
I think some conservatives are seeking a way of life that never existed. Since conservative presidents like Reagan and George W. Bush haven’t been able to deliver on promises to social conservatives, of course they will blame the judges.
If Reagan and Bush really want to blame somebody, they should blame the American people. Many people, when backed into a corner, will get an abortion. Many will drink alcohol. Many will gamble. Many teenagers will not practice abstinence.
Of course, social conservatives can blame liberal Hollywood. But when hasn’t Hollywood been interested in making money first. How is 20th Century Fox any different than Exxon-Mobil? A corporation is created to make a profit for its shareholders. Why does Hollywood continue to make stupid horror films for teenagers? Because teenagers are the biggest piece of the movie-going pie.
Post a Comment
I think some conservatives are seeking a way of life that never existed. Since conservative presidents like Reagan and George W. Bush haven’t been able to deliver on promises to social conservatives, of course they will blame the judges.
If Reagan and Bush really want to blame somebody, they should blame the American people. Many people, when backed into a corner, will get an abortion. Many will drink alcohol. Many will gamble. Many teenagers will not practice abstinence.
Of course, social conservatives can blame liberal Hollywood. But when hasn’t Hollywood been interested in making money first. How is 20th Century Fox any different than Exxon-Mobil? A corporation is created to make a profit for its shareholders. Why does Hollywood continue to make stupid horror films for teenagers? Because teenagers are the biggest piece of the movie-going pie.
Links to this post:
<< Home





