Comments on: Democrats Threaten to Filibuster Unnamed Court Nominee

By: Conservative Outpost

Conservative Outpost — Thu, 29 Sep 2005 14:12:51 +0000

Daily Summary

NEWS: - Roberts Set to Be Confirmed - How Some Democrats Will Vote on Roberts - John Roberts Would Likely Allow Hearings on Partial-Birth Abortion Suit - Bolton: Some U.N. Reform Can Be Seen OPINION: - Abstinence Education Programs: Changing...

By: Christian Coalition Blog

Christian Coalition Blog — Thu, 29 Sep 2005 14:07:25 +0000

Daily News & Opinion

By: Unpartisan.com Political News and Blog Aggregator

Unpartisan.com Political News and Blog Aggregator — Thu, 29 Sep 2005 05:39:19 +0000

SCOTUS Nominee May Be Announced By Week's End

Washington, D.C. (AHN) - President Bush has narrowed his list of possible successors to retired Just

By: SoloD

SoloD — Wed, 28 Sep 2005 18:28:40 +0000

I think that Brown and Owens were compromises by the Dems on the Gang of 14, meaning that they didn't like them, but were willing to allow them through to appellate positions in exchange for some of the others not going through. (I don't remember any Democrats, or even Republican, members of the Gang of 14 talking about them being qualified, just that it was necessary to avoid the nuclear option showdown.) But the Supreme Court is a different case, and certainly the Dems have a right to filibuster if they think they need to.

By: Anderson

Anderson — Wed, 28 Sep 2005 18:20:06 +0000

Well, if I were a Dem asked to vote on an unnamed nominee, I'd filibuster too!

[/litella]

By: Sneem

Sneem — Wed, 28 Sep 2005 16:54:19 +0000

You gotta love these guys. No one has even been nominated and already they are talking filibuster. They are as predictable as the sun coming up. Maybe they would do better if they spent their time coming up with an idea or two.