[maxelson]

Ah, it never ends:
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/02/20/po...D-JUDG.html?hp

I especially love the part about "unprecedented obstructionist tactics". Well. I know we'll all brawl about this, and we have gone over it before- ad nauseam- but 98% of the President's nominees have gone through. What. We up to 5 now that the Lefties didn't like? Let's all take a look at those five. They have much in common.

This is beyond insulting. Ah, yes. Integrity in government. Wait until the branch goes on recess- then act. Chock FULL of integrity, I tell ya. I don't care what your party is- this is wrong on every level. Everyone raise their middle finger and salute democracy. And before anyone comes in with that "slimy democrats" and "unprecedented obstructionist" crap, I'd like to take the opportunity to remind you all of the "blue slipping" what was a favorite tactic of the current majority during the Clinton years.

[daimoni]

This is slightly off-topic, but I was thinking about this on the way back from the store - you know, how some people are totally against having 'pride' for ones country.

For example, I know many Germans are a bit touchy on the subject. And they were probably indoctrinated after the war to be that way. Or maybe it just comes naturally.

But I'm thinking, there's no 'shame' in 'pride'. Why shouldn't we feel proud when the people of our communities work together "to build a more perfect union" or even "to build a more perfect local library"? What's wrong with having pride when we clean up our parks and beaches? Or being proud of our other civic achievements? Nothing, really. Unless your belief system tells you it's a 'sin' - in which case you're already screwed.

I think the reason our country (and any country) is ****ed is because most people just don't care enough to care. It's a complete lack of pride. And it just feeds and feeds on itself for generations and generations and manifests itself in our current (and past) Administrations.

But dastardly maneuvers like this Prior confirmation makes it just that more difficult, as a nation, as human beings... to be 'proud' of our country.

[maxelson]

Ooop. Small edit: Pryor. I meant Pryor.

And Dai: I agree.

[vmpaul]

Yeah, I don't like it either but Clinton did the same thing apparently. Partisan wrangling again.

President Clinton Appoints Roger Gregory to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

[spacefreak]

Originally posted by maxelson:
Ah, it never ends:
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/02/20/po...D-JUDG.html?hp

I especially love the part about "unprecedented obstructionist tactics". Well. I know we'll all brawl about this, and we have gone over it before- ad nauseam- but 98% of the President's nominees have gone through. What. We up to 5 now that the Lefties didn't like? Let's all take a look at those five. They have much in common.

This is beyond insulting. Ah, yes. Integrity in government. Wait until the branch goes on recess- then act. Chock FULL of integrity, I tell ya. I don't care what your party is- this is wrong on every level. Everyone raise their middle finger and salute democracy.

It has to do with the ridiculous use of filibusters by the Democrats with these nominees.

The 7 (including Pickering and Pryor) being denied a vote just so happen to be federal circuit court of appeals nominees, and the filibusters are strategically being used on nominees to specific circuits.

The "numbers" the Democrats include in their misportrayals of confirmation percentages, etc. - the bulk of the confirmed judges used in their "number" are district court judges.

The Democrats already raised their middle fingers and saluted democracy when they began this filibustering fiasco and prevented the nominations from being voted on. These nominees would have easily gotten the voted needed to be confirmed. Where were your cries for integrity and democracy then?

[SimeyTheLimey]

Originally posted by vmpaul:
Yeah, I don't like it either but Clinton did the same thing apparently. [/URL]

So did George Washington, for that matter.

[theolein]

If you build loopholes into your laws, expect some people to abuse them.

[maxelson]

I could not care less what president does it. It is BS and simple dirty pool.

[maxelson]

Spacefreak: once again- we have 7 out of... how many? 160? I don't care for the tactic, but when it is the ONLY tool you have, well, there it is. Republicans did the same thing during the previous dem majority. Except, now, the Rs are trying to permenantly change the rules- and who do you think will hollar so loudly when the majority changes hands and their own rules come back to bite them?

If youre willing to condemnt the Dems- you had best be willling to say that the Majority is contributing to its own little tragedy.

[SimeyTheLimey]

Originally posted by maxelson:
I could not care less what president does it. It is BS and simple dirty pool.

So is a tiny minority of senators preventing the senate as a whole from voting on judicial nominees. That also prevents the process of confirmation from taking place.

That behavior in the Senate can be defended as being fully within Senate rules. But if you take that position, then you can't consistently attack the president for also acting within the rules.

[vmpaul]

Originally posted by SimeyTheLimey:
So did George Washington, for that matter.

That bastard. That does it. I'm only going to use Sacagawea coins from now on.

[BRussell]

None of this really gets me all that worked up. But I can't think about any of this judiciary/confirmation business without thinking about the fact that Republicans stole thousands of Democrats' documents about this over the past year and no one seems to care.

[spacefreak]

Originally posted by BRussell:
None of this really gets me all that worked up. But I can't think about any of this judiciary/confirmation business without thinking about the fact that Republicans stole thousands of Democrats' documents about this over the past year and no one seems to care.

Oh yeah, those memos that were in an unprotected folder on the congressional network - many do care, especially when considering the contents of those memos.

Remember what was in those memos?

Confidential Democratic memos downloaded from a Senate Judiciary Committee database and leaked to the press show that Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-Mass.) overcame the reservations of 15 Senate colleagues to convince Democrats to wage filibusters against some of President Bush's judicial nominees.<snip>

The documents also show in detail the evolution of Democratic opposition to Bush's controversial nominees, from an initial hesitancy over blocking nominees with no obvious negative marks on their records to being fully committed to blocking those considered well qualified by the American Bar Association, such as Estrada, who subsequently withdrew his name from consideration.

The Democratic strategy has been to require 60 votes for confirmation of targeted conservative nominees, a tactic that the Republicans say has no precedent in Senate annals.

At times Kennedy, and committed allies such as Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) discussed leaning on the Judiciary Committee's top Democrat, Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Ill.), to slow down the nomination process. That indicates that Leahy was at times more open minded toward those targeted nominees than some of his harder-line colleagues, whom ultimately prevailed.

The memos also cast light on the considerable influence liberal special interest groups such as People For the American Way, the Alliance for Justice, and the NAACP Legal Defense & Education Fund, have had on Democratic decisions to delay and ultimately filibuster the nominees.

On the basis of the memos, a Wall Street Journal editorial and The Washington Times first reported that Democrats followed a recommendation by Elaine Jones of the NAACP Legal Defense Fund, to stall the nomination of Judge Julia Gibbons to the U.S. Court of Appeals for 6th Circuit until after that court decided on two major affirmative action cases.<snip>

One document opposing Estrada argued that "the D.C. Circuit is far too important to appoint someone about whom we have so many questions. Key labor, civil rights, environmental, and administrative law cases are decided there, and we know it is a "feeder" circuit for the Supreme Court.... We can't repeat the mistake we made with Clarence Thomas."

In February, the Democratic staff suggested Kennedy urge colleagues that "we must filibuster Miguel Estrada's nomination" while a memo to Kennedy, Durbin, Schumer and Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.) seven months earlier warned that Estrada would be difficult to defeat. A memo to Durbin in November of 2001 suggested against filibustering Estrada.

At times, Kennedy, Durbin and Schumer apparently pressured Leahy to delay hearings on nominees, despite Leahy's preferences.

For example, Leahy suggested in the summer of 2002 holding a hearing for 6th Circuit nominee Deborah Cook on Aug. 1. But the hearing did not take place until January of 2003 after Democratic staff urged Kennedy, Durbin, Schumer to ask Leahy to postpone the hearing.

[boots]

The whole thing bugs me, but only because the process has been blown way out of proportion.

The fact that Bush did another "recess appointment" doesn't bother me, because it only stands for the rest of the term. Next year, the nomination must happen again. This gives the candidate a record that congress can point to and give a (perhaps) more informed consideration to the candidate. If it were truly a circumvention of the process, they wouldn't have to go through the nomination process again.


The checks and balances work for both sides here.

[rambo47]

I've become quite disillusioned with Washington politics in general. I feel confident saying "All Politicians Suck". Once they get into service and begin "business as usual" in the house and senate I have no use for them. At all. Party affiliations be damned, they all simply suck. I might even agree with a few ideas held by one or two politicains but they still all suck. And the magnitude of their suckage grows exponentially every day.

The ideals of Democracy set forth by the founders of The U.S. have been almost completely lost. Personally I'd love to see every single washington weasel voted out of office so we can start all over from scratch. Maybe next time we could find decent, honest, non-self serving people who will actually be responsible to the voters. Fillibusters used to stop the democratic process, yet remain technically within the rules, is one thing that makes me want to puke. Another is attaching unrelated riders to laws, like a spending project in Utah being attached to a Civil Rights law. Happens all the time. This quid-pro-quo, mutual trading of favors can't be what Thomas Jefferson
invisioned for the future of America.

[BRussell]

Originally posted by spacefreak:
Oh yeah, those memos that were in an unprotected folder on the congressional network - many do care, especially when considering the contents of those memos.

Remember what was in those memos?

Haha, so they reveal exactly what the dastardly secret Democratic strategy was: to filibuster some nominees! Uh, wait a second, didn't they do that openly? Oh yeah.

What amazes me is that even after the Republicans stole Democratic memos, this is the worst they could find - that Ted Kennedy has a lot of influence in his committee, and that liberal groups communicate with Democrats. The Dems are much more honest than I would have ever thought.

I guess you haven't gotten the Republican talking points, because they are backing off on any defense of what happened. I'd bet they know what's going to happen, and they don't want to be caught defending the indefensible:

In a joint statement, Judiciary Committee Chairman Orrin G. Hatch (R-Utah) and Sen. Patrick J. Leahy (Vt.), the ranking Democrat, said: "While it is premature to judge whether any crime has been committed, it is clear that unethical conduct has occurred." Hatch said he had personally expressed regrets to Democratic senators and to staffers whose files were improperly accessed.

Others, including Cornyn, suggested a further investigation by law enforcement authorities.

Although not all Republicans spoke up, it appeared that Hatch had strong bipartisan support on the panel for pursuing the probe, despite criticism from some conservatives for his role in triggering the investigation.

Hatch told reporters after the meeting that his computer files also had been accessed but declined to say who was responsible. He repeated an earlier statement, which infuriated some conservatives, that he was "mortified that this improper, unethical and simply unacceptable breach of confidential files occurred on my watch."

Some conservative advocacy groups say any investigation should focus on the contents of the Democratic memos -- which they describe as proof of Democrats' collusion with liberal interest groups on judicial nominations -- instead of dwelling on GOP staffers accessing the files.

While some Republican senators have said more attention should be focused on the Democratic memos, none mentioned this issue yesterday. But they did suggest that partisan hostilities on the committee may have encouraged young staffers to cut corners. "We are part of the problem because an atmosphere of politics has crept into our deliberations, especially on judges," Kyl said.

And here.

Three top Senate conservatives have told GOP conservative groups to lay off Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah), who helped trigger a controversial investigation into leaked Democratic Judiciary Committee documents.

Senate Republican Policy Committee Chairman Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.) and Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.), both members of the Judiciary panel, personally delivered that message to a group of nearly 20 conservative leaders last week. Senate Republican Conference Chairman Rick Santorum (R-Pa.) also briefly attended the meeting on Capitol Hill.

The 90-minute session grew heated at times, as the visiting conservative leaders repeatedly interrupted the senators and questioned their handling of the memo controversy.

But the senators, who received last week a closed-door briefing on the investigation from Senate Sergeant at Arms Bill Pickle, warned conservatives they might come to regret their position when the results of the probe are fully known. Pickle is expected to finish his investigation by March 5.

[spacefreak]

Originally posted by BRussell:
I guess you haven't gotten the Republican talking points, because they are backing off on any defense of what happened. I'd bet they know what's going to happen, and they don't want to be caught defending the indefensible

Yeah, we Republicans don't do the talking points thing like the Democrats do.

I'm not supporting the network trespassing. I'd be more disturbed if there was security that was broken in order to view the memos, but that doesn't seem to be the case. These files were unprotected and sitting up on the network for all to see.

If I was working in the Senate, and I was cruising the network and stumbled upon a folder with opposition memos detailing strategery and conspiracies to block nominations, I'd have a tough time ignoring what I found. And if I went to the same location 6 months later, and there were more documents, and it was still unprotected...let's just say that I think it's a tough call. I'd be a lot more sure of my dismay if it was known that hacking was taking place to get into the files, but there wasn't. And when I put myself in the staffer's position...I just don't know.

Either way, the content of those memos was appalling.

And the Democratic Senators should be telling their network staff to get their crap together and make sure their confidential files are secure and protected.

[SimeyTheLimey]

Originally posted by spacefreak:
If I was working in the Senate, and I was cruising the network and stumbled upon a folder with opposition memos detailing strategery and conspiracies . . .

Mr. President, I'm honored that you would join us, but don't you have more important things to do than debate on a Mac board?

[BRussell]

Originally posted by spacefreak:
If I was working in the Senate, and I was cruising the network and stumbled upon a folder with opposition memos detailing strategery and conspiracies to block nominations, I'd have a tough time ignoring what I found. And if I went to the same location 6 months later, and there were more documents, and it was still unprotected...let's just say that I think it's a tough call. I'd be a lot more sure of my dismay if it was known that hacking was taking place to get into the files, but there wasn't. And when I put myself in the staffer's position...I just don't know.

Remind me to lock my doors if you're ever in my neighborhood, since you're so unsure if you could control yourself.

[spacefreak]

Originally posted by SimeyTheLimey:
Mr. President, I'm honored that you would join us, but don't you have more important things to do than debate on a Mac board?

Hahahaha! That's awesome.

[spacefreak]

Originally posted by BRussell:
Remind me to lock my doors if you're ever in my neighborhood, since you're so unsure if you could control yourself.

We're talking about a folder on a network server.

A better analogy would be to make sure your hot 16 year-old daughter keeps her blinds/curtains closed at night, because the neighbor's 13 year-old boy - his bedroom window faces her bedroom window, and puberty is hitting him pretty hard.

[BRussell]

Originally posted by spacefreak:
We're talking about a folder on a network server.

A better analogy would be to make sure your hot 16 year-old daughter keeps her blinds/curtains closed at night, because the neighbor's 13 year-old boy - his bedroom window faces her bedroom window, and puberty is hitting him pretty hard.

And then he takes pictures and sells them to papers and then when she complains about it he demands an investigation into her breast size. But I do agree that these people who did this have the ethical grounding of a horny 13-year-old boy.

I also wonder if the White House, which was obviously heavily involved with the judicial nomination process, saw these stolen documents.