journalist3072
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jan-19-05 08:44 AM
Original message |
Idea I Had Last Night....Derailing Condi's Nomination |
|
OK, so I had this idea for derailing Condi's nomination, but I'm not sure if this is possible, under Senate rules.
I was thinking what if, after Condi's nomination gets reporting out of the Foreign Relations Committee and to the full Senate, Barbara Boxer filibusters the nomination. Would it be possible for her to do that?
I was thinking maybe Boxer could filibuster the Condi nomination. If she could, would that kill the nomination forever,and force Shrub to choose someone else?
|
Spinzonner
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jan-19-05 08:48 AM
Response to Original message |
1. I doubt enough Democrats and moderate Republicans would block a Cloture |
Norquist Nemesis
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jan-19-05 08:50 AM
Response to Original message |
2. She could, but likely would commit political suicide |
|
What I'd like to see is the Congress employing the democratic process. If the Democrats, as a minority, won't be able to vote it down, then so be it. But this, "I'll be voting in support" preface before throwing softball questions just makes them look petty when they start voicing real criticisms after she's sworn in.
Hey Congress! Yoo Hoo!! Vote NO and stick with bringing the sunshine onto the failures and mistakes! THAT'S showing 'resolve'!
|
Walt Starr
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jan-19-05 08:54 AM
Response to Original message |
3. She could only put it off |
|
A single Senator can filibuster only so long as they can stand and talk. Once she is forced to yield the floor due to fatigue, the filibuster is over.
|
Earth_First
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jan-19-05 08:56 AM
Response to Reply #3 |
4. Someone get that woman a cup of coffee... |
|
It's the 4-year fillibuster time!
|
Nicholas D Wolfwood
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jan-19-05 09:24 AM
Response to Reply #3 |
8. No, they can invoke cloture to make her stop talking. |
|
It only takes 60 votes, and I guarantee the Dems aren't willing to filibuster Condi.
You have to use the filibuster sparingly, and so you use it for the permanent damage positions - the court appointees.
|
Walt Starr
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jan-19-05 09:42 AM
Response to Reply #8 |
12. Not unless she yields the floor, two different types of filibusters |
|
and yes, she can refuse to yield the floor to allow them to invoke cloture. The problem is, if she collapses from fatigue, that is considered a yielding of the floor.
It's doubtful anybody would do something like that, though.
|
txaslftist
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jan-19-05 08:59 AM
Response to Original message |
5. Actually, I think they call them "dreams" not "ideas". |
meegbear
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jan-19-05 09:02 AM
Response to Original message |
6. The repugs would use this ... |
|
as another "reason" to get rid of filibusters altogether.
Good idea, but not in this climate.
|
me b zola
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jan-19-05 09:08 AM
Response to Original message |
7. As much as I like the idea of her never achieving the confirmation |
|
I like the idea that Sen. Boxer is putting her on record, under oath.
In terms of this administration,keep thinking....NIXON.
|
Nicholas D Wolfwood
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jan-19-05 09:25 AM
Response to Reply #7 |
9. Weren't Democrats in charge of Congress under Nixon? |
|
Point is, these Repugs won't ever take down Bush.
|
K-W
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jan-19-05 09:37 AM
Response to Reply #9 |
11. If Bush becomes a political liability, they will string him up |
|
Edited on Wed Jan-19-05 09:38 AM by K-W
They are loyal to him because right now Bush and his people control who gets elected to office. They control party access and the financial streams into and within the party. Republicans who dont play ball end up facing extremely well funded ultra conservatives in their next bid for realection.
If the nation turns on him electorally, or if the party fractures, he could very easily find himself in a position where itis in the best political interest of republicans to destroy him, and they would in a second.
There is also the fact that Republicans suck at governing, if they make a big enough mess even this delluded country might turn on them and elect a democratic congress.
|
K-W
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jan-19-05 09:32 AM
Response to Original message |
10. It isnt even worth trying. |
|
If they back Bush against a wall with the fillibuster, the Republicans will remove the option.
The democrats are right on this one. They may only get one shot to use the fillibuster to block a nominee, and it should be a judicial nominee, not a cabinet nominee. Condi deserves to be held accountable, but at the end of the day, the president is going to pick a cabinet that serves his purposes, and it will end in 4 years. Judges are much harder to oust.
They should do exactly what some of them are doing, hammer Condi with questions, make a big stink about her failures, but not waste procedural maneuvering on replacing condi with another Bush lackey who hasnt yet lied to the entire nation, but certainly will in due time.
|
rachelbirds
(72 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jan-19-05 10:43 AM
Response to Original message |
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Fri Apr 26th 2024, 08:14 AM
Response to Original message |