March 2, 200521 yr Repubs were hoping Salazar would be willing to jump the fence and help Bush get through his nominees that got rejected but that looks unlikely. WASHINGTON (AP) -- A freshman Senate Democrat urged President Bush on Tuesday to withdraw all of his renominated judicial candidates, a blow to Republicans who had hoped to get the lawmaker's support to break possible filibusters. Colorado Democrat Ken Salazar, who some Republicans had suggested might be willing to vote with them for certain nominees, wrote Bush asking him to withdraw all of the candidates Democrats blocked in the Senate during the president's first term. "The decision to renominate these individuals will undoubtedly create the animosity and divisiveness ... that is not helpful to our nation and will sidetrack our collective efforts to work on other crucial matters," Salazar wrote. The development coincided with the Senate Judiciary Committee's first hearing for one of those blocked nominees, William Myers, once the top lawyer at the Interior Department. The committee chairman, Sen. Arlen Specter, put Myers first because the Pennsylvania Republican hoped that Salazar and some Democrats would support his nomination. The Senate has 55 Republicans, 44 Democrats and one Democratic-leaning senator. Specter needs 60 votes to ensure Democrats cannot block Myers. "I count 58 votes," Specter said Tuesday before Salazar's announcement. But Myers' nomination is one that Salazar is asking the president to abandon. A spokesman for Salazar said the senator had not decided how he will vote on Myers or any other nominee. But withdrawing Myers and the other blocked nominees "would be a recognition that the Congress and the president must work on those matters where we can find common purpose," said Salazar. If Republicans have more than 50 votes for Myers, he should be confirmed, said Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tennessee. "The country deserves a system that allows us to give advice and consent, because that's our obligation. And we should be able to vote for him on the floor up or down," he said. Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid did not see much hope for Myers and other renominated candidates. "We're going to treat them just the same as we have in the past," said Reid, D-Nevada. At the hearing, Myers tried to convince Democrats that he would be a fair and impartial judge if confirmed for the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which oversees cases from nine states in the West. Liberal and environmental groups complain about what they say is his advocacy for mining and cattle interests. "As a lawyer, I was an advocate of my clients," Myers said. "If I was to be confirmed, I would be an advocate for the law." Few Democrats seemed convinced. "I believe Mr. Myers to be the most anti-environment nominee sent to the Senate in my time here," said Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vermont. Added Sen. Charles Schumer, D-New York: "Your record screams 'passionate activist.' It doesn't so much as whisper 'impartial judge."' Terrence W. Boyle, a former aide to retired Sen. Jesse Helms, R-North Carolina, gets a hearing Thursday for his nomination to the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, based on Richmond, Virginia. On Tuesday, the committee will consider the nomination of Thomas Griffith, former counsel to the Senate during the impeachment of President Clinton, for a seat on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. http://www.cnn.com/2005/ALLPOLITICS/03/01/...s.ap/index.html
March 2, 200521 yr Well, Frisk can get rid of the fillibuster if that what it has to come to. :confused
March 3, 200521 yr Curious lefties never had such "advocacy" concerns over the ambulance chaser that ran for veep. :plain 699675[/snapback] boooo! hisss! lawyers suck! except for Ken Starr of course.
March 3, 200521 yr Curious lefties never had such "advocacy" concerns over the ambulance chaser that ran for veep. :plain 699675[/snapback] boooo! hisss! lawyers suck! except for Ken Starr of course. 700394[/snapback] For the record - IMO the Clinton mugging was a complete waste of time and money. 700425[/snapback] Flip-flopper. And if you support the destruction of the filibuster than you are not smart at all. What happens when the cycle returns to Democrats again and the Republicans can't filibuster. Oh well, sucks for you.
March 3, 200521 yr Curious lefties never had such "advocacy" concerns over the ambulance chaser that ran for veep. :plain 699675[/snapback] boooo! hisss! lawyers suck! except for Ken Starr of course. 700394[/snapback] For the record - IMO the Clinton mugging was a complete waste of time and money. 700425[/snapback] Flip-flopper. And if you support the destruction of the filibuster than you are not smart at all. What happens when the cycle returns to Democrats again and the Republicans can't filibuster. Oh well, sucks for you. 700472[/snapback] I dont think anyone intelligent said anything about getting rid of the filibuster
March 3, 200521 yr Curious lefties never had such "advocacy" concerns over the ambulance chaser that ran for veep. :plain 699675[/snapback] boooo! hisss! lawyers suck! except for Ken Starr of course. 700394[/snapback] For the record - IMO the Clinton mugging was a complete waste of time and money. 700425[/snapback] Flip-flopper. And if you support the destruction of the filibuster than you are not smart at all. What happens when the cycle returns to Democrats again and the Republicans can't filibuster. Oh well, sucks for you. 700472[/snapback] I dont think anyone intelligent said anything about getting rid of the filibuster 700476[/snapback] Ok so none of the Republicans pushing for that are intelligient? That just proves my point.
March 3, 200521 yr I don't support the destruction of the fillibuster yet, but if Bush starts nominating judges and no non-liberal gets through, it'll be time for Frisk to act.
March 3, 200521 yr Author I don't support the destruction of the fillibuster yet, but if Bush starts nominating judges and no non-liberal gets through, it'll be time for Frisk to act. 700662[/snapback] non-liberal in your mind=biased conservative.
March 4, 200521 yr I don't support the destruction of the fillibuster yet, but if Bush starts nominating judges and no non-liberal gets through, it'll be time for Frisk to act. 700662[/snapback] non-liberal in your mind=biased conservative. 700710[/snapback] Non-liberal in you mind=biased conservative. :plain
March 4, 200521 yr Curious lefties never had such "advocacy" concerns over the ambulance chaser that ran for veep. :plain 699675[/snapback] boooo! hisss! lawyers suck! except for Ken Starr of course. 700394[/snapback] For the record - IMO the Clinton mugging was a complete waste of time and money. 700425[/snapback] Flip-flopper. And if you support the destruction of the filibuster than you are not smart at all. What happens when the cycle returns to Democrats again and the Republicans can't filibuster. Oh well, sucks for you. 700472[/snapback] I dont think anyone intelligent said anything about getting rid of the filibuster 700476[/snapback] Ok so none of the Republicans pushing for that are intelligient? That just proves my point. 700477[/snapback] Politics. The republicans who are 'pushing' to 'destroy' the filibuster know it isnt going to happen. But to the constituents it shows a sense of 'by all means necessary' and people like that. Thats one reson clinton was popular
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.