Freethought & Rationalism Archive

ohwilleke · 07-24-2003, 07:56 PM

What disgusts me most about an event like the Pryor committee vote is that not one Republican was willing to be reasonable in a truly egregious case. If the Republicans took a guy like this in stride and restrained their out of control President, they'd be worthy of some claim to actually thinking, instead of simply being follow the leader robots with no good judgment whatsoever.

Toto · 07-24-2003, 09:04 PM

Arlen Specter voted to send the nomination to the Senate floor, but has not promised to vote for him. (He's probably deciding if he would rather deal with a primary challenge from the religious right or a stronger Democratic opponent.)

It would only take two Republicans to kill his nomination on the Senate floor.

enfant terrible · 07-26-2003, 11:27 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Toto
[B]Arlen Specter voted to send the nomination to the Senate floor, but has not promised to vote for him. (He's probably deciding if he would rather deal with a primary challenge from the religious right or a stronger Democratic opponent.)

He made the right and obvious decision - politically, of course.

The last thing he wants is to alienate the White House and the conservative base before the primaries. And by the actual election time, the issue will have been largely forgotten - especially if the Democrats successfully filibuster the confirmation.

Toto · 07-27-2003, 03:59 PM

Accusations of Anti-Catholic Bias Anger Democrats, especially Catholic Democrats

Quote:

Senator Richard J. Durbin, who is Catholic, said he reached his limit at a committee meeting on Wednesday when Senator Jeff Sessions, Republican of Alabama (and a Methodist), began explaining Mr. Pryor's positions as "what a good Catholic believes."

Mr. Durbin, an Illinois Democrat who personally opposes abortion but backs abortion rights, added, "I understand the painful process I have to go through with the elders of the church on many of these issues, explaining my position. But it is galling, to say the least, when my colleagues in the Senate, of another religion, start speaking ex cathedra."

Many Catholic elected officials are, perhaps, particularly sensitive to the line between religious faith and public responsibilities. It was a line drawn most vividly by President John F. Kennedy, the first Catholic president, who had to deal with widespread fears that a Roman Catholic president would serve both Rome and the American people.

Kennedy responded by declaring, "I believe in an America where the separation of church and state is absolute, where no Catholic prelate would tell the president, should he be a Catholic, how to act, and no Protestant minister would tell his parishioners for whom to vote." In recent years, Gov. Mario M. Cuomo reasserted that line, particularly regarding abortion.

Toto · 08-01-2003, 12:58 AM

Senate Democrats Block Pryor Nomination

Quote:

"I don't think my colleagues are against the Catholic church, but it sure seems like they are against the traditional, pro-life conservative Catholic,'' Hatch said.

Sen. Patrick Leahy, a Vermont Democrat, said such talk smacks of "religious McCarthyism,'' and that members of his party were unaware Pryor was Catholic until Hatch explicitly asked the nominee at his confirmation hearing last month.

. . .
Democrats say they also have the votes to sustain a filibuster against a fourth, California jurist Carolyn Kuhl, who Hatch said is also Catholic. Bush has nominated her to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco.

A test vote on Kuhl's nomination had been set for Friday, but was later postponed until shortly after Congress returns from its summer recess in September.

. . .

"What we are seeing, de facto, from members of the other side is a religious test,'' said Sen. Rick Santorum, a Pennsylvania Republican.

Sen. Charles Schumer, a New York Democrat, told Republican colleagues, "you are good people, but the arguments you are using are the last refuge of scoundrels.''

"We're called anti-Catholic. This charge is despicable,'' said Leahy, who described himself as "a lifelong Catholic.''

Leahy sought to offer a resolution on Thursday that a nominee's religious affiliation never again be asked at a confirmation hearing. Hatch objected, denying him needed unanimous consent.

pug846 · 08-01-2003, 08:31 AM

This is a side note, but to say the 9th Circuit is full of loonies because they are the most overturned is ridiculous. The 9th Circuit is by far the largest circuit, and therefore, if they weren�t the most overturned, it would be rather surprising. The circuit, which has over twice the number of judges as the average circuit, is so large that there has been talk for years about splitting it into two circuits. In fact, the circuit is so large that it decides nearly one-sixth of all federal appeals. By percentage, the Ninth Circuit is not the most overturned circuit; several circuits are ahead. (And since so few cases are overturned, the difference between the most overturned and the least overturned is less than a full percentage point.) Here�s some random snippets from various sites:

Quote:

The Ninth Circuit also has the largest caseload of all 13 circuits. The First Circuit, Tenth Circuit, Seventh Circuit, and the D.C. Circuit combined have about the same number of cases as the Ninth Circuit. The Ninth Circuit, with 28 active judges, also far exceeds the federal circuit average, outside the Ninth, of 12.6 active judges.

Quote:

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals decides nearly one-sixth of all federal appeals. In 1997, thanks to reexamination of case processing procedures and constant innovation, the court terminated almost 40% more cases than it terminated only eight years ago with the same number of authorized judicial positions. This has been accomplished despite the fact that in 1997 one-third of the authorized judicial positions remained vacant.

Quote:

In the last term, the Supreme Court reversed 76% of all cases it reviewed from all of the circuit courts nationwide. In 1996, several circuits had a higher Supreme Court reversal rate than the Ninth Circuit, although lower in absolute numbers due to smaller caseloads.

Quote:

In 1996, the Ninth Circuit terminated 4,415 cases on the merits. The Supreme Court reversed 28 of these decisions, representing fewer than one percent of all merit terminations by the circuit. The Supreme Court reversals represent a very small percentage of the total Ninth Circuit decisions.

Quote:

There have been more cases from the Ninth Circuit to the Supreme Court than any other circuit in recent years. There have also been more cases decided by the Ninth Circuit in recent years than any other circuit. As set forth in the study by the Honorable Jerome Farris, a Ninth Circuit judge recently senior, in 1995 the Ninth Circuit decided 7,955 matters, in 1996 7,813, and in 1997 8,701. The percentage of reversals as against the total number of cases decided was 3/10 of 1%.

Immaculate Deception · 08-01-2003, 12:23 PM

I watched a little of this on Wednesday. The Republicans are crying about how the Democrats are holding up the Energy Bill by not voting on Pryor, Estrada, etc., when in fact the Republicans decided to schedule votes on these judicial nominations in the middle of the Energy Bill debate. They fully *know* that Demo's will filibuster, and then try to blame the fact that the Energy Bill isn't passed...onto the required cloture vote needed to cease debate and to move back to the EB's proposed amendments.

Not to mention Orrin Hatch's hypocrisy in not allowing the use of Rule 4.

Idiots.

ID

Toto · 08-04-2003, 02:56 PM

New York Times Editorial: Playing the Religion Card

Quote:

On one level, it is almost comical to watch Republican senators like Jeff Sessions, a Methodist, and Orrin Hatch, a Mormon, accuse Democrats like Patrick Leahy, Edward Kennedy and Richard Durbin � all Catholics � of anti-Catholicism. What is not funny, however, is the way these charges needlessly set group against group.

In the Senate debate last week, Mr. Leahy rightly asked why "fair-minded Republican senators" were not standing up to their party's demagogy and "religious McCarthyism." Even senators who support the administration's nominees should be speaking out against the dangerous charges of religious bias being made on their behalf.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

07-24-2003, 07:56 PM	#71
ohwilleke Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Denver, Colorado, USA Posts: 4,834	What disgusts me most about an event like the Pryor committee vote is that not one Republican was willing to be reasonable in a truly egregious case. If the Republicans took a guy like this in stride and restrained their out of control President, they'd be worthy of some claim to actually thinking, instead of simply being follow the leader robots with no good judgment whatsoever.

07-24-2003, 09:04 PM	#72
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	Arlen Specter voted to send the nomination to the Senate floor, but has not promised to vote for him. (He's probably deciding if he would rather deal with a primary challenge from the religious right or a stronger Democratic opponent.) It would only take two Republicans to kill his nomination on the Senate floor.

08-01-2003, 12:23 PM	#77
Immaculate Deception Regular Member Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Wisconsin Posts: 104	I watched a little of this on Wednesday. The Republicans are crying about how the Democrats are holding up the Energy Bill by not voting on Pryor, Estrada, etc., when in fact the Republicans decided to schedule votes on these judicial nominations in the middle of the Energy Bill debate. They fully know that Demo's will filibuster, and then try to blame the fact that the Energy Bill isn't passed...onto the required cloture vote needed to cease debate and to move back to the EB's proposed amendments. Not to mention Orrin Hatch's hypocrisy in not allowing the use of Rule 4. Idiots. ID

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.