:dubious:
You don’t really think that agreement was meant to cover SCOTUS nominees?
I think if we’re not careful the republicans will vote it into law.
Cloture vote is on Mon, FYI.
The Dems will save the fillibuster against the possibility of a 3rd SCOTUS vacancy. Kerry must know this, I think he’s just making what he sees as a principled stand, since he’s got nothing to loose anyway.
Also it doesn’t hurt for the Dems to look like they’re seriously considering a filibuster, even if they know it won’t work this time. If a 3rd SCOTUS seat opens up in 2007, and the Repub approval ratings have continued to slide and their senate majority has shrank, the fact that the Dems made moves towards a filibuster now when their position was weak will add to the threat that they’ll actally do it next time around. Bush then might be more likely to put forward a moderate to save the Repubs the embarassement of a filibuster fight.
A long shot, perhaps, but it doesn’t hurt them to try.
It might help him get the nomination by playing to the extreme left… it won’t hurt him in a general because that alone wouldn’t sway many opinions.
And in the spitit of the Goth guy … fuck Teddy Kennedy!
It was meant to cover all judicial nominations by the president, including SCOTUS nominations. See Part II.
There has to be a rabidly foam-flecked Democratic asshole for Hilary to look moderate in comparision to. Kerry is filling that role in this instance.
He is not going to be nominated again, so he is sacrificing his political capital as senior Democrat to draw the Anybody But Bush crowd together into a Anybody But Anybody Associated With Bush crowd. Alito was nominated by Satan; therefore Alito is Satan.
Same winning strategy as 2004, in other words.
Regards,
Shodan
Calls for a filibuster can’t hurt, especially considering that there won’t be one. And Alito will be confirmed, no question. Already there are a few Democrats who have declared that they’ll vote for him: Ben Nelson (D-Nebraska), Robert Byrd (D-West Virginia) and Tim Johnson (D-South Dakota). There may be others, but there are those three, at least. And Harry Reid has said he won’t call for a filibuster, so it’s not too likely that Kerry will be able to get his filibuster off the ground.
However, it probably does have more to do with a possible run for president in 2008. I have a hunch that Kerry’s going to try it but will realize that he just doesn’t have the support come late 2007 and withdraw from the race. He’ll be able to court the remaining candidates and throw his support behind one of them, setting himself up to be more influential in the Senate, where I predict he’ll be handily reëlected in a sleepy, uncontested race in 2008.
This filibuster attempt will serve to stir up Democrats, which is useful, but will eventually accomplish nothing where Republicans are concerned, since Alito will be confirmed, no question. The Republicans will get their way, again, and they’ll forget about it. Then Alito’s record will be out there for all to see, once he starts voting on cases, and that will reflect on the Republicans one way or another. I suspect that Alito’s votes will appeal to the radical right, alienating the moderate Republicans and infuriating Democrats and independents, who will take out their anger on the party that put him there in the first place. I also predict that any major decisions will be put off until early 2007, when they’ll have no influence on the 2006 elections, while having as little influence on the 2008 elections as possible.
Kerry gets one group of Democrats worked up; Reid keeps them in check; Alito gets confirmed either way. Only this way, the only passion comes from the Democrats, and the Republicans have nothing to get their noses out of joint over—and emotional indignity is the kind of thing their campaigns have depended on for the past fourteen years or so. Score: 30/love, to the Democrats.
Call me crazy, but yes.
(Emphasis mine.)
But in this instance, Bush did not consult with Senate Democrats (or Republicans, AFAIK) before he proposed Alito – did he?
Meh, won’t make a difference.
First, I think Alito will simply give Scalia a third vote on the SCOTUS. We’ll see if I’m wrong.
As for Kerry? There was a time in this country where a loser could come back and take another shot at The Big One. I think that time is passed.
He can fillibuster all he wants. He can make sure he does everything he can to get his name out there in the media from now until the primaries in '08. He’s still not going to pull it off.
-Joe
Kerry won’t be nominated anyway so the question asked in the OP is moot (or mute…sorry, inside joke 
).
There won’t be an Alito filibuster and Kerry knows it. However, he gets some goodies out of doing this IMO…its a win/win for him. First of all, he gets some press out of it and plants the idea that he was opposed to the nomination. He draws off the left wing nuts to himself as their champion (kind of what duffer and a few others were getting at). He’s safe so what difference to him?
And he gets his position on record. As others have said, who is going to remember a filibuster ATTEMPT a few years from now? No one. However, if by some chance Alito does something that would have called into question his nomination (I doubt it but its possible)…well, then Kerry (and by association the Dems) are on record for at least attempting the filibuster (and it can be spun that they were thwarted by those evil Republicans…in a few years the general public won’t remember any of this so you can spin at will).
Anyway, thats what I think Kerry is getting at with this stance. I don’t think its a stance from principal but a tactical political move on his part. Hell, if things REALLY work out well it might even get him back into the big game…
-XT
I don’t know if it’s fair to say that Kerry is organizing this effort. The story I read in my paper today made it sound more like a group of Dems, including Kerry, were lobbying for a filibuster. Anyway, I don’t see how you score poltical points by trying to accomplish something like this and failing. It just makes you look weak, politically. Who knows what Kerry’s motivation is. The group may really just be sending a signal to the Pubs that the next SCOTUS confirmation effort will be all out war.
You mean Kerry’s planning to try a run for the democratic nomination against President Gore?
maybe they think they cn hold 60 and want to force the nuke option before the '06 election.
(I’m not su
If you mean 2008, that would be President Pelosi.
Funny…I don’t recall that attitude being prevalent among the Dems when Bush nominated Harriet Myers! Rather, it was the right wing nutsos that torpedoed that nomination.
Sort of. Meirs never even got to the committee hearings, so the Dems weren’t pushed to give a yeah or nay. Who knows how they would’ve reacted to her had the process gotten that far.
As for Kennedy making Hillary look moderate… well, she’s on board with the filibuster crew, too. As is Feinstein, which really shocks me considering the pubilc statements she made against that action. This is all an inside-the-beltway thing anyway. Alito will be confirmed, and most of the country will forget this as the next scandal of the week gets front page play. Kerry will score some points with the big Democratic donors, and everyone will be happy.
Still, Bush is probably glad this is going on-- any news time that the filibuster talk gets is news time taken away from the Abramoff scandal and other not so helpful news items.
call me crazy (oh, go ahead…)
This is almost starting to get interesting.
Feinstein is scared of Sheehan, (and she ought to be)Remember, if Inoouye and Pryor go with the filies someone could hold joe L’s tallis for ransom…
Now, that is laughable. Sheehan has relgated herself to the whackiest fringes of the left. Feinstein is very well respected in CA. Maybe the most respected pol from that state. She could squash Sheehan with her little toe.
Obviously, they would praise her intelligence, extoll her virtues and warmly commend Bush for discovering such a legal gem. Yep, that’s what they’d do. Obviously.