John Roberts: The Senate Backing
In the mist of evacuations along the Texas coast, and the pounding of hurricane Rita, John Roberts was backed 13-5 in the senate for as Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. Republicans were unanamious in affirming him, five Democrats voted no, but five crossed party lines and voted to back his nomination. His confirmation is all but a certainty.
When Clinton was in the White House, he made it his business to cross party lines and appoint a few Republicans to his Cabinet. Bush has only appointed one to my knowledge. The lunchons that the Senate and House have after hearings are known to be divided up along party lines, with Democrats believing that they are meant to feel unwelcome. Here we have Democrats crossing party lines, whereas not one Republican would dare to do so, and vote in favor of the confirmation. Why is it that the Republicans believe that it is the Democrats who are inflexible, rigid and adversarial where history has demonstrated, especially during these past five years that it is the Republicans who are in fact affraid to cross party lines in any way, shape or form?
What, if anything are your feelings on this issue?
Thank you for your minds.
When Clinton was in the White House, he made it his business to cross party lines and appoint a few Republicans to his Cabinet. Bush has only appointed one to my knowledge. The lunchons that the Senate and House have after hearings are known to be divided up along party lines, with Democrats believing that they are meant to feel unwelcome. Here we have Democrats crossing party lines, whereas not one Republican would dare to do so, and vote in favor of the confirmation. Why is it that the Republicans believe that it is the Democrats who are inflexible, rigid and adversarial where history has demonstrated, especially during these past five years that it is the Republicans who are in fact affraid to cross party lines in any way, shape or form?
What, if anything are your feelings on this issue?
Thank you for your minds.
9 Comments:
Thank you nsc...I have made the corrections.
But you seemed to have missed the entire point of my post, which seems to be a typical response coming from many who do not want to respond to the facts as they stand.
In light of the word 'backed' being replaced by 'confirmed', any response?
This is quite simple...Dems are setting themsleves up with this vote for the O'connor seat. In order to make their all out assault on the next pick seem reasonable, they have to (in some good numbers) support Roberts so it doesnt appear that they are against all CONS regardless of qualifications....you can bet there will be no crossing the lines with Brown or estrada....and btw the senate vote on Ginsburg, the MOST lib member of the CT was 97-3!
My point, Dag, which you have not addressed, is why the Republicans, during the last 5 years, have been unanimous in their voting, themselves not crossing any lines, and why BUsh has only nominated one Democrat to his administration. Moreover, why are the Democrats made to feel unwelcome at the lunchons?
You can post whatever you like, so long as you are repectful. I do notice a pattern to your posting, howerver, where you come here when there is something with political implications, and you feel the need to defend the conservatives.
Just my two cents.
I think some repubs may be affraid of the bush
any republican that once crossed party lines on any issue got hell from the bush white house
I'm not sure how I feel on Roberts to be honest. My knee jerk reaction is to hate him because $hrub nominated him.
I listened to some of his testimony and I thought to myself "another windbag who talks and talks but doesn't say a word" but that's how it is with all super educated people.
I'm certainly skeptical about trusting a persyn who wouldn't answer questions directly nor had his prior writings available for all to see.
Why would $hrub nominate someone who doesn't parrot back what he parrots? To do so would imply that other opinions besides his own (and the people pulling his strings) are valid.
The future scares me...
(why can't I comment on your most reent post... Is it just my computer being weird, or did you disallow comment for your own personal reasons?)
Slick was faced with a Republican Senate, he had to make some cross the line gestures. Junior does not have the same concerns.
As regard Roberts, he has the appearance of another O'Connor. I have hopes....the next nominee will be the one that may change the face of the court. I hope, for the better
We don't know anything about him. He wouldn't answer any questions. To me, that is incredibly terrifiying. He'll be on the court for the nexy 50 years. We should be allowed to know what kinds of decisions he's likely to make. As a woman, I am becoming increasiongly anxious. As a liberal, I'm horrified. He'll be confirmed, and no matter what he says, I think he's going to go after Roe once Bush's second nominee is confirmed.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home