It appears Bush has made good on his promise to start spending his political capital. So, here we stand. The Democrats have fought hard and won several key battles over judicial appointees last term. However, they did it through the filibuster, which while a time honored and traditional method of blocking bills that are anathema to the minority, still must be recognized as the counter-majoritarian influence that it is. In light of that, what is the Hatrack thought on the new move in Bush's judicial game, basically resetting the pieces to exactly where they stood at the beginning of the fight and making the Democrats spend even MORE of their influence on the same fight they already won? In short, he has re-submitted all of the nominees the democrats blocked during his first term.
While he is definately in his rights to do this, and to spend his political capital as he believes, he has also made promises to be more open to the Democratic minority. Slapping them in the face with these few judges that they obviously drastically disagree with is not a sign of offering a hand of peace to the other side.
Unless ones definition of bi-partisanship is when the other side is forced to do everything I say.
Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :
Lets not forget that most of his recommendations...by a huge majority...WERE approved.
I hear people talk about the nominations that were turned away a lot, but no one mentions the ones who were approved.
Also, Repbilicans use fillabusers too, so I find it strange that now that they don;t need them they are so egar to remove the pratice.
It was good enough for them when they were the minority....
Kwea
Posted by Morbo (Member # 5309) on :
Bush's cynical lip service to bipartisanship politics will catch up to him when he fails to gain Dem. support for his agenda.
If the Senate Repubs actually go through with the "nuclear option" (drastically weakening filibuster rules), that will backfire on them too.
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)