BS: another end run

Subject: another end run
From: kendall
Date: 28 Jun 01 - 08:10 AM

Have you heard the latest from "Foggy Bottom?" The Senate republicans are demanding that Bush appoinees be allowed to bypass the Senate Judiciary committee, and, go directly before the full senate. I can see it now, a bench full of Clarence Thomas' YUK!

Subject: RE: BS: another end run
From: LR Mole
Date: 28 Jun 01 - 10:46 AM

One can choose to believe it or not, but news says that Anita Hill was character-mugged so that Clarence Thomas could become a Supreme. New book out by someone who was there, and helped. Stay tuned.

Subject: RE: BS: another end run
From: kendall
Date: 28 Jun 01 - 10:51 AM

I have always believed she was telling the truth, and, I'll never forgive Joe Biden and the other democrats for caving in on this nomination. She did not want to testify because she knew what they would do to her. There were other eyewitnesses who were not allowed to testify according to her. That man is either a fool or a liar, claiming he had never discussed Roe v Wade with anyone!

Subject: RE: BS: another end run
From: Irish sergeant
Date: 28 Jun 01 - 11:08 AM

Why this surprises anyone over say twenty is beyond me. These are the same people who ran a self-confessed felon (Oliver North) for senate in the state of Virginia. These are also the same people who want Governor Keating to head the FBI. The same Keating of the mid-eighties banking scandal. Write or E-mail your congressional represenatives and senators and let them know that you disapprove of that plan. Be they Democrat or Republican. Apparently the rules only apply if you're a Democrat or if they favor the Republicans. I have to tell you the GOP has been going down hill ever since Lincoln was murdered. Kindest reguards, Neil

Subject: RE: BS: another end run
From: Bill D
Date: 28 Jun 01 - 11:15 AM

yeah, I heard it on the radio...the guy (a right wing Republican) says he flatly lied in print to protect Thomas and destroy Anita Hill, and now is embarassed to have sold out as a journalist.....

So. now that the Senate Judiciary committee has a Dem. chair, they don't want appointees in front of it? Why, sure that seems reasonable...those picky Democrats might want have the temerity to ask the wrong questions.

Subject: RE: BS: another end run
From: jeffp
Date: 28 Jun 01 - 11:35 AM

...those picky Democrats might want have the temerity to ask the wrong questions. ...and expect truthful answers.

Subject: RE: BS: another end run
From: Whistle Stop
Date: 28 Jun 01 - 12:14 PM

Not only did he lie in print -- he published a best-selling book of his lies. It was called "The Real Anita Hill," by David Brock, I believe. Mr. Brock presented fabricated evidence about Ms. Hill, and was widely quoted as saying that the evidence showed her to be "a little bit nutty, a little bit slutty". Mr. Brock has now recanted.

Subject: RE: BS: another end run
From: kendall
Date: 28 Jun 01 - 12:18 PM

He should be forced to apologize on national TV.

Subject: RE: BS: another end run
From: DougR
Date: 28 Jun 01 - 02:18 PM

Yes, he should, Kendall. Brock evidently will do ANYTHING to promote his books, and TV talking head shows will be scrambling to get him on their programs to give him more publicity. Why should anyone believe him now? A liar recants? Big deal. Oh, and yes, he has another new book to tout on those shows.

Incidentally, he never was a conservative republican. When he wrote the book "exposing" Anita Hill, conservative talk-show hosts touted the book on their programs, but they were duped too, and Mr. Brock probably sold many of his books containing his lies as a result of their proving him free publicity.

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: another end run
From: DougR
Date: 28 Jun 01 - 02:31 PM

On the judicial issue, Kendall, I believe the Republicans fully expect that the nominees will be submitted to the the Judiciary Committee. What they want to be assured of is that the nominees will not be locked up in committee because of their political beliefs. They want the committee to refer all nominees, after the committee has considered them, to submit them to the full Senate for consideration. The committee will likely recommend the ones they don't like not be approved. The full Senate, however, would be allowed to vote up or down on each candidate.

What's unreasonable about that?

Sure, the majority of them will philosophically be conservatives but why should that be surprising. Bush is President and he is a conservative Republican (perhaps not as conservative as many think he is however).

Nominees should not be savaged as Robert Bork was. A man who Senator Lehey lauded as being a very qualified candidate and then when he appeared before the committee, joined Senator Kennedy and other liberal senators in ripping him apart for being a conservative.

Three hundred plus judges nominated by President Clinton were approved by a Republican dominated Senate. All our side is asking for is the same fair treatment. If a candidate is qualified on legal terms, he/she should be approved, regardless of his/her political beliefs. Judges are not there to make laws; they are there to interpret laws.

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: another end run
From: kendall
Date: 28 Jun 01 - 03:42 PM

Any new judges appointed by Bush should be run through the same process that they have always been run through. This is clearly another attempt to bypass the committee so he can get more Clarence Thomas' on the bench. Why should his nominees get any better treatment than any other judge has had in the past? Also Bork was not jumped on because he was conservative, he was jumped on because, among other things, he had never done one minute of Pro Bono work. I dont recall how many of Clintons nominees were shot down by the republicans, more than one I'm sure. No my friend, the old rules applied to Clinton, and the old rules should apply to Bush. No more Clarence Thomas'

Subject: RE: BS: another end run
From: DougR
Date: 28 Jun 01 - 09:08 PM

Shucks, Kendall, you're tough! **BG**

Subject: RE: BS: another end run
From: kendall
Date: 28 Jun 01 - 09:30 PM

I know it! I hate that in a man!!

Subject: RE: BS: another end run
From: Whistle Stop
Date: 29 Jun 01 - 08:03 AM

According to a recent story on NPR, the Republican-dominated Senate during the Clinton administration had an appalling record on approval of judicial nominees. They routinely held them up in committee, where a single nay vote could tie up a nomination indefinitely (I'm not sure exactly why this is, but apparently it's how the rules work). This led to the current shortage of federal judges in this country. Now the Republicans want to fill the void (or stack the deck?) by fast-tracking their nominees through the same process, and the Democrats are resisting this -- which constitutes either revenge or fair play, depending on your point of view.

Subject: RE: BS: another end run
From: kendall
Date: 29 Jun 01 - 08:17 AM

What's good for the goose............can be rough on a woodpecker.

Subject: RE: BS: another end run
From: Hollowfox
Date: 29 Jun 01 - 05:26 PM

If this goes through, the Republicans will want to get rid of it, when there's a Democrat in the presidency and there's a democrat controlled congress. That's what happened with the two term presidential limit.

Subject: RE: BS: another end run
From: Greg F.
Date: 29 Jun 01 - 06:46 PM

Standard '90's Republican crap- no surprises here. Either they are too stupid to see the hypocrisy in their proposal, or they're too morally bankrupt to care. Either way, a pretty reprehensible display.

Subject: RE: BS: another end run
From: DougR
Date: 30 Jun 01 - 01:01 PM

I read in the paper this morning that the Republicans caved on the issue. Rather than bring the senate to a halt, they agreed to accept written assurance from the Democrats that they would follow the standard rules, and submit the nominees to the full senate for consideration.

How that differs from what the Republicans wanted, I'm not quite sure.

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: another end run
From: thosp
Date: 30 Jun 01 - 01:30 PM

oooooooops -- i thought this was a football thread --- sorry -- some of you know what GREAT faith i have in politicians! ;)

peace (Y) thosp

Subject: RE: BS: another end run
From: kendall
Date: 01 Jul 01 - 12:21 AM

If they are going to send the whole list to the full Senate anyway, why bother with a committee?

Subject: RE: BS: another end run
From: DougR
Date: 01 Jul 01 - 12:57 AM

Well, this is just a guess, Kendall, but I suspect that it is the job of the Senate to advise and consent, not the committee. But that's just a guess.

Any good fishing in Maine, by the way? Fly fishing, I mean.

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: another end run
From: kendall
Date: 01 Jul 01 - 09:08 AM

I gave up fly fishing, too hard to clean them. Seriously, You are asking the wrong man, dont go fishing at all, but, if you were to visit L.L.Bean, they have a school which I believe is free, and, one of their outdoor experts could steer you in the right direction. I do know that we have some great salmon rivers, but, I have no clue about seasons etc. My working days were on the high seas (commercial fishing). If you do come to Maine, I sure would like to meet you.

Subject: RE: BS: another end run
From: DougR
Date: 01 Jul 01 - 12:35 PM

Well, one of these days I might pop up there to see my friend, Nan Wilder, who lives in Newcastle. If I ever do, we sure will meet!

Doug