Quote:
|
Originally Posted by lookout123
example: this morning i heard Bill Nelson (sen. from FL, i believe) say that he doesn't really have a problem with the nominee per se, but "why should the white house get to have all their nominees?"
i'm not sure, but i thought that was how it worked. the president nominates, the senate confirms or denies based on qualifications.
|
For one thing, Nelson's basically a Republican to begin with; you can take whatever he says with a grain of salt.
For another, "confirm or deny based on qualifications" does not equate to "everyone the President nominates is automatically qualified." If mere possession of conservative values was a disqualifier, the Democrats would have filibustered a lot more than 10 of Bush's nominees.
There are a hell of a lot of other conservative judges in this nation who would be qualified for federal judgeships. Bush could have finessed the situation easily by nominating new judges in place of the blocked 5%, then others, then others until all spaces were filled. The Democrats would either have REALLY looked bad by being forced to blatantly filibuster multitudes on strict partisan grounds, or would have been forced to confirm judges who fall well within Bush's philosophy with a comparative minimum of fuss.
But that's not what this is about. This is about the Republicans declaring that they control the floor, control Congress, and can use their majority status to render the minority irrelevant. Objections to ten judges, no matter how strenuous? Too bad, the President wants them, so they're being renominated and going through even if the Senate rules have to be changed to stifle minority dissent.
But to circle back to the original topic, how PRICELESS was it yesterday when Lautenberg (D, NJ) whipped out a placard with Emperor Palpatine on the floor of the Senate, quoting from the new Star Wars movie in support of his arguments?
<img src=http://img272.echo.cx/img272/7946/palp6bc2ht.jpg>