|
|
|
Not unless his fellows Senators were also watching him on TV
crayz |
Homepage |
05.23.05 - 9:46 pm | #
|
|
Right...becuase he wasn't at the Senate wearing that tie?
Ryan S. |
Homepage |
05.23.05 - 10:28 pm | #
|
|
That Compromise will be broken on Renquist...that is obvious...I am a little upset, I actually wanted this to be voted on...im a little mad the dems are backing down on this one.
Ryan |
05.24.05 - 3:05 pm | #
|
|
This compromise is good PR for both parties in the end. The Dems are no longer "obstructionist" and the Reps. do not appear to be as domineering and power hungry as they otherwise would have. Though polls show the public was opposed to Repubilcan efforts, accusations of obsructionism have worked well in the past for Republicans (Daschel, for instance). This is an armistace, not a treaty, howerver, so it will be interesting to see what happens in the long run.
I don't think the Dems would block a Reinquist replacement unless he/she is very radicle. Reinquist is already Conservative, and they know Bush isn't going to appoint another Ginsberg to the bench. I think even Scalia would get approved, though probably not unanymously as before. The real test will come when/if one of the liberal judges steps down or passes on. If Bush doesn't go moderate with a replacement there, it could get ugly very quickly.
Mike McKain |
05.25.05 - 12:15 pm | #
|
|
Commenting by HaloScan
|