The Republicans’ Filibuster Lie

Interesting Op-Ed piece in the May 3 L.A. Times by David Greenberg. He’s a history professor at Rutgers University. Seems the charge that filibustering judicial appointments is unprecedented is not only false, but was actually started recently by Republicans.

To justify banning Senate filibusters in judicial nomination debates, Republicans are claiming support from history. Until now, say Republicans such as Sen. John Kyl and former Sen. Bob Dole, no one has used filibusters to block nominees to the federal courts. Because Democrats have broken an unwritten rule, their logic goes, Republicans are forced to change written ones.

But the charge that filibustering judicial appointments is unprecedented is false. Indeed, it’s surprising that so few Washington hands seem to recall one of the most consequential filibusters in modern times, particularly because it constituted the first salvo in a war over judicial nominees that has lasted ever since.

From 1897 to 1968 the Senate rejected only one candidate for Supreme Court (in 1930). However, since 1968, six candidates have been rejected or withdrawn, and four others have faced major hostility. June 13, 1968, Lyndon B. Johnson tried to appoint his long-time friend and advisor, Abe Fortas, when Earl Warren retired. On September 25, 1968, Republicans and southern Democrats started a filibuster to prevent Fortas’ nomination. Johnson eventually withdrew the nomination on Oct. 2. Look for the particulars at www.latimes.com.

The New Theocracy is Here!

By a vote of 100 – Zip in the U.S. Senate and with only 88 dissenting votes in the House, King George II this morning (in his pajamas) signed into law the first bit of legislation that could sincerely qualify as the beginning of a Theocracy.

WASHINGTON (CNN)—The fight over whether Terri Schiavo’s feeding tube should be restored moved to federal court Monday after Congress passed emergency legislation in the severely brain-damaged woman’s case.

President Bush signed the bill into law early Monday, shortly after it cleared the House of Representatives by a 203-58 vote. The Senate passed the legislation by voice vote Sunday.

The unprecedented move transferred jurisdiction in the case to a federal judge for review.

Our Congress and

King President felt the necessity to intervene in the hospital room of ONE INDIVIDUAL because THEY speak for

dog God. Can the Thought Police be far behind???

“Justice” System?

So about this “alleged” rapist that grabbed a deputy’s gun and shot up a courthouse in Atlanta, I’m reminded of the couple who were studying bears up close and personal. Doesn’t anyone see a possible problem with escorting suspected violent felons with anything less than an unarmed 300-lb linebacker, or maybe two? Treating people with respect also means respecting their possible violent tendencies and preparing for them accordingly. I feel badly for the victims and their families, but doesn’t the system need to bear some of the responsibility here? Isn’t the “Justice System” supposed to train their people to act professionally? What am I missing?

Posters on New York busses suggest reading a book will get you some oral sex.

A great link here. Reminded me of some bumper stickers that appeared a few years ago, “Save a tree – Eat a beaver!” Anyone else rember some good posters or bumper stickers?