We received our National Republican Senate Campaign Leadership Survey in the mail today. We filled it out. We marked our choices. In the box where you put your campaign donation, we marked it, and put nine cents in the blank for the amount of the donation. We then put a nickel and four pennys onto a blank piece of paper and taped them to it, to prevent them from sliding around in the envelope. We put everything in the return envelope, and mailed it off.

Some might say that we are grandstanding, or are trying to be a smart aleck, such is not the case. We are simply trying to prove the point we made here, here, and here.

We would not be in the position today with stealth nominees to the Supreme Court if Senate Republicans had held their ground and destroyed the Democrats un-constitutional use of filibustering judicial nominees. The gang of fourteen is as much to blame for this situation as well. There were seven Republicans on that gang who should be remembered when their election comes around again.

For now all we can do is try and put some backbone into the Republican Leadership to destroy the act of filibustering judicial nominees. The best way to accomplish that is by withholding monetary support. Sooner or later they will get the message.

We would encourage everyone who gets the survey to do exactly as we have done. The message will be loud and clear.

Democrats have been gearing up for the judicial nomination wars since they lost the Senate to the Republicans. The Judiciary is their last vestage of power, and they are holding on with a death grip. What we have seen to this point with filibusters, maneuverings, calling for documents, then more documents, are all attempts to obstruct any nomination made by the President. This is all a smoke screen for their attempt to impose their minority power beyond it’s scope, and get only their approved nominees on the floor for a vote.

A Supreme Court nominee seems immanent and thus the latest proposal by Senate Democrats for a consultation. Bench Memos, has a post by Bradford Berenson entitled, A Tactic for War, not a Proposal for Peace. Here is in part what he says about this Democrat proposal:

” First, let’s be clear about what the Senators (Read the rest of the story below the fold...)

In a Washington Times article written by, Charles Hurt today entitled, Senate Democrats develop new filibuster strategy in which he describes the new strategy by Senate Democrats to filibuster Presidential nominees.

It seems that a direct filibuster is proving to be costly to Democrats which is the reason for the new tactic. This new strategy is an attempt to keep the nominees in the Judiciary Committee forever, and if passed out of there, to stall on the floor by the “non-filibuster”, (request documents forever while refusing to grant cloture) filibuster. According to Mr. Hurt’s article, qualifications are no longer important, but ideology is the most important factor to some. Here is a quote from the article:

“Mr. Schumer was asked whether Democrats would filibuster Judge Boyle if Republicans don’t produce additional unpublished opinions.
“We’ll have to see what happens,” he said. “First, we want to see if there’s a good-faith effort to get them. It is hard to get unpublished opinions.
“Second, when we get them, if there’s no smoking gun it’s not going to matter,” Mr. Schumer said. “If we think there really is a smoking gun — that we need more time to go forward — so be it.”

Mr. Hurt’s article is worth reading.

So the deal by the gang of fourteen may have all been for nothing after all. If a nominee does make it to the floor, we can only hope for Majority Leader Frist to trigger the nuclear option, and end this unconstitutional nonsense once and for all.

With all that has happened this week in the judicial nominee confirmations, we should not be too jubilant over the fact that Senate Democrats finally fulfilled their constitutional duty in giving a few nominees an up or down vote.

The Senate Democrats and their MSM allies have found themselves in a losing position on this issue, and they changed their rhetoric yesterday to one of blaming the Senate Republicans, and the Bush administration for the lack of time spent on legislative issues in the senate. It is they who have caused a lack of attention, if there is one, to legislative issues by their obstructionism on judicial nominees.

We should also remember that the “deal” by the gang of fourteen is only temporary. Senate Democrats will use the filibuster again, and the decision to do so will come shortly. They have endured a lot of criticism from their extreme liberal (Read the rest of the story below the fold...)

Our thanks to Confirm Them, for pointing to a a Hardball Transcript, in their post entitled, June 6 Hardball. Senator Byrd’s comments on Hardball are as follows:

“Well, it means exactly what it says. The president shall have the power to appoint, and, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, shall appoint certain officers of the United States, including judges to the Supreme Court.

Now, what you have here is an attempt to pack the courts. FDR tried that in 1937. He failed, because the Senate filibustered and the people became informed as to what was going on. Here we are. We’re talking about federal judges, people who are appointed for a lifetime, for a lifetime, on the federal bench. And the president shall appoint by and with the advice and consent.

Well, there has been a lot of talk about (Read the rest of the story below the fold...)

Just like the writers at Red State, we too have a day job, and have to make a living for our family, so here are a couple of interesting links.

First, Hugh Hewitt has two great articles. The first is, A house on fire. Here is a part:

“Whether this was a blunder or a plan to recover from a blunder, we won’t know for years. Mr. McCain at first said he would “listen to the leadership” regarding judicial nomination procedure, only to suddenly, on an apparent impulse, declare to Chris Matthews that he would vote against ending the disfigured filibuster. The backlash against him was immediate and intense. Perhaps he thought he could undo the damage to his carefully planned political rehabilitation with a bold “compromise.” The result seems just the opposite. Not only is his political house on fire, so too is (Read the rest of the story below the fold...)

Peggy Noonan is at her finest in this piece in the Wall Street Opinion Journal, entitled, Mr. Narcissus Goes to Washington. This is just enough to make you go read the whole article:

“John McCain wryly reminded us not to miss A&E’s biography of his heroic Vietnam experience. Joe Lieberman referred to the group as “this band of brothers, and sisters.” But my favorite was Lindsey Graham, who said, “I know there will be folks ‘back home’ who will be angry, but that’s only because they’re not as sophisticated and high-minded as I am. Actually they’re rather stupid, which is why they’re not in the Senate and I am. But I have 3 1/2 years to charm them out of their narrow-minded resentments, and watch me, baby.”

Oh, excuse me, that’s not what he said. That’s only what he meant. It was the invisible scroll as (Read the rest of the story below the fold...)

Our thanks to Confirm Them for their editorial today, On the constitutionality of Senate Rule XXII:, which points to the John Jay Hooker Center for Election and Campaign Finance Reform.

Mr. Hooker wrote in an artical yesterday, entitled, Senator Frist is Right – Compromise is Wrong, where he makes a compelling case that judicial nominee filibustering is un-constitutional. This is what he wrote:

“Sen. Frist has every right, and indeed the duty, to see that every presidential nominee for the Federal bench at every level gets an up or down vote. That is the constitutional requirement, notwithstanding the fact that the Senate for 200 years has failed to acknowledge the constitutional requirement set out in Article II, Section 2, Paragraph 2, which mandates that the Senate advise and consent with respect to all judicial nominees. The requirement is (Read the rest of the story below the fold...)

What follows is the Oath of Office taken by every Senator prior to being seated in the Senate of the United States of America.

“I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God.”

The source of the oath is taken from the Senate website found here.

These seven Republican Senators broke their oath of office and defied the constitution, when signing onto the “compromise deal”. The States they represent are in parentheses.

John McCain (AR)
John Warner (VA)
Mike DeWine (OH)
(Read the rest of the story below the fold...)

Robert Novak has a commentary on Real Clear Politics this morning which backs our theory we published here, yesterday. His commentary, Senate’s Sham Debate outlines the following:

“Senators droned on last week, supposedly debating two female nominees for the U.S. appellate bench, but it was a sham. The real issue was the future makeup of the Supreme Court, which explains the audacious Democratic strategy of blocking President Bush’s choices for lower courts. The focus on the high court also has resulted in failure so far in seeking a negotiated settlement.”

Sen. Allen predicts showdown will end in ‘nuclear option’ in a Washington Times article written by James G. Lakely and Charles Hurt.

Confirm Them has all the latest on the filibuster, here.

As we have written here before, filibustering is about power, control of the legal system, and governing by minority. We as the majority have rights as well, and it is time for the majority to exercise those rights.

Please contact your Senators and these wobblers today!

Here are their names and contact information:

Sen. Lincoln Chafee (RI) 202-224-2921
Sen. Susan Collins (ME) 202-224-2523
Sen. Mike DeWine (OH) 202-224-2315
Sen. John McCain (AZ) 202-224-2235
Sen. Olympia Snowe (ME) 202-224-5344
Sen. John Sununu (NH) 202-224-2841
Sen. John Warner (VA) 202-224-2023
Sen. Chuck Hagel (NE) 202-224-4224
Sen. George Voinovich (OH) 202-224-3353

The Senate switchboard number is 202-225-3121. E-Mail and other contact information can be found here.

Senator Elizabeth Dole, writes these words via the Washington Times, in an op-ed piece entitled, Nominees deserve better. Here is the excerpt:

“Resorting to half-truths and invective to advance a political objective — the establishment of a new 60-vote supermajority requirement for the confirmation of federal judges — is deeply unfair to those who have spent a lifetime building reputations for fairness and intellectual probity.”

She further writes the following:

“While the Democrats cannot plausibly justify overturning more than 200 years of Senate tradition by filibustering the president’s judicial nominees, let’s also remember it is equally unacceptable to treat these nominees as political pinatas to further this aim.
Justices Owen and Brown, and Judge Boyle have earned their reputations as common-sense jurists who apply the law fairly and impartially. Attacking their good names will not diminish the simple fact that they (Read the rest of the story below the fold...)

While we wait for the Senate to finally finish debate on the two current judicial nominees before them, we should take a look at how it is progressing.

On the one hand, Red State is reporting here that Sen. Chuck Hagel, R-Neb., has finally gotten the fence post pulled out, and is now supporting Senate Majority Leader Frist’s effort to end judicial nominee filibustering. Here is the excerpt:

“Sen. Chuck Hagel, R-Neb., for weeks said he was undecided on whether to back a move by Frist, if it comes. Wednesday, he officially rejected signing on to a compromise.

“I believe that all of the president’s nominees deserve an up or down vote,” Hagel said, quoted by spokesman Mike Buttry. “The agreement that has been proposed calls for three of the president’s nominees not to get a vote. I could not agree to that. That is (Read the rest of the story below the fold...)

Bellicose is the word to describe what is currently happening on the Senate Floor with the pronouncements being made by Senate Democrats. Their desperate attempt to hold onto their tyrannical minority obstructionism is not only unconstitutional, it is wrong. The accusations being made against the Republican Majority, and Judicial Nominees Owen and Brown are no longer an attempt to debate the qualifications of the nominees, but a smear campaign against them personally, and each Republican Senator who supports the option to end nominee filibusters.

The whole idea of filibustering judicial nominees is a ploy to govern by minority rule in a nation where the majority is granted the constitutional right to govern. The same avenue of tyrannical minority rule is the chosen vehicle of Liberal Democrats through activist judges in the courts. Thus the sparks, outbursts, tantrums, and vehement blustering are spewing forth in the futile hope of hanging (Read the rest of the story below the fold...)

The “paper of record”, the New York Times, has pronounced a detonation of the “constitutional – nuclear – Byrd” option to take place tomorrow. In an article published today entitled, Senate Leaders Break Off Talks on Judicial Nominees, Carl Hulse states the following:

“Dr. Frist and Mr. Reid have been exploring similar approaches in proposals and counterproposals over a few weeks. Dr. Frist now intends to advance two nominees, two state Supreme Court justices, Priscilla R. Owen of Texas and Janice Rogers Brown of California, on Wednesday.”

CBS News also indicates the showdown is imminent. Their article is here.

Finally, Radio Blogger thinks it will happen tomorrow as well if the Times story above is true. See his comments here.

If the day of reckoning has finally come and you have not made your opinions known to your Senators. DUH! (Read the rest of the story below the fold...)

We are going to start off with an editorial published in the Wall Street Opinion Journal today entitled, How We Got Here: Why Republicans can’t let the judicial filibuster succeed. The writer’s main point is as follows:

“As for Republicans who want to preserve the option of filibustering a future nominee, it’d be just as wrong for them to do so. And Democrats willing to use the filibuster to block judges would not have any qualms about using the nuclear option themselves to kill a filibuster in the future. Ted Kennedy and Chuck Schumer believe in the “whatever it takes” school of politics.

This is at its core a political fight, and elections ought to mean something. Republicans have gained Senate seats in two consecutive elections in which judicial nominations were among the most important issues, including against the Senate Minority Leader. The one Democrat from (Read the rest of the story below the fold...)