Just To Be Clear 
A filibuster is still possible, given the adamant opposition of many good Senate Democrats to Alito. Most have not ruled it out. But there are indications that at least a few Democrats, if not a whole bunch of them, are going to vote "No" on Alito but will not support a filibuster. To which I want to say, just to be clear:
Voting "No" on Alito but "Yes" on cloture is the same as voting "Yes" on Alito. No matter what they say. No matter how many speeches they give. When a filibuster is your only option to stopping the nomination, and you know that, then you must support a filibuster -- unless you just don't care.
(Some may recall that Lieberman did exactly this on the bankruptcy bill -- that is, he voted for closure and against the bill, when it was more than clear that a filibuster was the only way to stop it.)
Well, we've already discussed how Dianne Feinstein has indicated she'd be loathe to support a filibuster. Today, she was joined by fellow hypocrite Ken Salazar who is keeping cognitive dissonance in check long enough to explain that he is voting "No" on Alito but will not support the filibuster, since Alito is clearly qualified. But he's voting no, because, um, he must not think he's qualified. But he won't support a filibuster, because he is so qualified. Or not.
But really, as has been noted elsewhere, the cake-taker is Mary Landreiu's fantastical rationale for opposing the filibuster: it would take time away from, you know, more important things than a silly old Supreme Court justice:
Because we have such a full plate of pressing issues before Congress, a filibuster at this time would be, in my view, very counterproductive. It is imperative that we remain focused on creating the tools New Orleans, Louisiana and the Gulf Coast will need to rebuild. This includes passing the Baker bill and allowing our state to keep its fair share of offshore energy revenues. We simply cannot afford to bring the Senate to a halt at a time when we need its action the most. If called to vote for cloture on Judge Alito's nomination, I will vote yes.
So, let me get this straight, if the Senate filibusters Alito they're going to cut off helping New Orleans rebuild? Wow, that's pretty easy to believe. And, look, Alito is only likely to be on the Supreme Court for 25 or 30 years, so why waste time on this?
Oh, and lest you think that Mary missed a golden opportunity to repeat, as if hypnotized, the GOP frame:
I will continue to consult with constituents, groups, organizations and colleagues to decide on my final vote. I do think it is important that we have an up or down vote.
I'll continue as soon as I re-assemble my just having exploded head. Okay, there we go. Does she really think that Unka Karl is going to give her a treat for carrying his water? Oh, and Mary, since the upperdownvote is so sanctified to the GOP masters you are currently serving so well, remind me again what the final tally was on Harriet Myers's upperdownvote?
Idiots. Sometimes one can't help but agree with John A. when he says it's time for an (almost) clean slate ...
-- Stu
KEYWORDS: Samuel Alito, Senate Democrats, Filibuster, U. S. Senate
Sign up for a Complimentary Member Account... Join the community! It's fast. And it'll allow you to take advantage of all this site's great features!
| < Staying on Message | Turning the Tide? > |
