See other Neocon Nuttery Articles
Title: Republican threatens filibuster if next Supreme Court nominee stands up ‘for the little guy’
Source:
[None]
URL Source: http://rawstory.com/rs/2010/0404/ky ... tens-filibuster-supreme-court/
Published: Apr 4, 2010
Author: http://rawstory.com/rs/2010/0404/kyl-thr
Post Date: 2010-04-04 19:56:08 by tom007
Keywords: None
Views: 434
Comments: 11
Republican threatens filibuster if next Supreme Court nominee stands up ‘for the little guy’ By David Edwards and Gavin Dahl Sunday, April 4th, 2010 -- 10:53 am submit to reddit Stumble This! 123Share scotussupremecourt112007 Republican threatens filibuster if next Supreme Court nominee stands up for the little guyThere is not yet a vacancy on the Supreme Court but the second-ranking Republican in the Senate is already planning a strategy of opposing President Barack Obama's potential nominee. Jon Kyl (R-Az) told Fox News' Chris Wallace that Republicans are prepared to fight a nominee who might stick up for the little guy, a position he called "overly ideological." Kyl had decried the use of the filibuster when Republicans were in the majority. "It's never been the case until the last two years that a minority could dictate to the majority what they could do," Kyl said in 2005. Since Democrats were the first party in decades to use the filibuster to block a judicial nominee, Republicans are within their rights to continue to use it, according to Kyl. Democrats blocked George W. Bush's nominee, Miguel Estrada in 2001. "It is wrong and it shouldn't be done but I think you would agree if only one side is permitted to do it -- the Democrats and not the Republicans -- you have a very unfair system," Kyl said Sunday. Story continues below... Sen. Arlen Specter (D-Pa) thinks there's a better chance for consensus next year and worries that a nomination fight this year would mean gridlock in the partisan Senate. "I think we need someone who will step into Justice Stevens' shoes, who will be very tough on the issues of executive power," Specter said. "A federal court this past week declared the warrantless wiretapping unconstitutional. I think we need the kind of balance that Justice Stevens has provided to offset the majority on the court which is in favor of executive power." "I am a little troubled by what Arlen said," Kyl responded. "Don't have somebody coming in with preconceived attitudes. I'm going to be tough on the executives or I'm going to be for the little guy, we've had too much of that." While speculation has been mounting for months that this might be his last session, this weekend Justice John Paul Stevens told the New York Times he has not yet made up his mind. He will turn 90 this month. This video is from Fox's Fox News Sunday, broadcast April 4, 2010.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: tom007 (#0)
deleted
The relationship between morality and liberty is a directly proportional one. "You've got to put right and wrong above legal and illegal. Because when tyranny becomes law, rebellion becomes duty; and it is not rebellion at all, it is submission to the higher law that our government is in rebellion to. We're not the rebels, they're the rebels."
At least this guy was upfront about it.
"Satan / Cheney in "08" The senator from Scotland makes his views known. Gridlock in the government is a GOOD THING, not something to be feared but celebrated.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. Most of em should be gridlocked up. Leg irons sound about right.
"Satan / Cheney in "08" deleted
The relationship between morality and liberty is a directly proportional one. "You've got to put right and wrong above legal and illegal. Because when tyranny becomes law, rebellion becomes duty; and it is not rebellion at all, it is submission to the higher law that our government is in rebellion to. We're not the rebels, they're the rebels."
As we know, it doesn't matter which party nominates USSC candidates.
deleted
The relationship between morality and liberty is a directly proportional one. "You've got to put right and wrong above legal and illegal. Because when tyranny becomes law, rebellion becomes duty; and it is not rebellion at all, it is submission to the higher law that our government is in rebellion to. We're not the rebels, they're the rebels."
deleted
The relationship between morality and liberty is a directly proportional one. "You've got to put right and wrong above legal and illegal. Because when tyranny becomes law, rebellion becomes duty; and it is not rebellion at all, it is submission to the higher law that our government is in rebellion to. We're not the rebels, they're the rebels."
deleted
The relationship between morality and liberty is a directly proportional one. "You've got to put right and wrong above legal and illegal. Because when tyranny becomes law, rebellion becomes duty; and it is not rebellion at all, it is submission to the higher law that our government is in rebellion to. We're not the rebels, they're the rebels."
Robert Reich?
he who wants bread is the servant of the man that will feed him, if a man thus feeds a whole people, they are under his control.
This whole thing makes me sick.
"Satan / Cheney in "08"
#2. To: Eric Stratton (#1)
#3. To: tom007 (#0)
Sen. Arlen Specter (D-Pa) thinks there's a better chance for consensus next year and worries that a nomination fight this year would mean gridlock in the partisan Senate.
Lord Acton
#4. To: James Deffenbach (#3)
Gridlock in the government is a GOOD THING,
#5. To: tom007 (#2)
#6. To: tom007 (#0)
#7. To: James Deffenbach (#3)
#8. To: tom007 (#4)
#9. To: tom007 (#4)
#10. To: tom007 (#0)
Republican threatens filibuster if next Supreme Court nominee stands up ‘for the little guy’
#11. To: DeaconBenjamin (#10)
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest