• ...Lost in this ruckus between Hillary & Obama is this gem of a quote from the still wet behind the ears junior Senator from Illinois: Obama said he was proud to have Hodes' endorsement, but conceded he would not have near the number of endorsements that other candidates, like Hillary Clinton will have. "We haven't been in Washington all that long and we haven't traded that many favors," Obama said. [Source: 7/26/2007 Boston Globe article "Obama: I won't get as many endorsements because I haven't traded favors" If that's the case, then Howard Dean must have traded a whole lot of favors including a really big one in order for Al Gore to endorse him for President back in '04. Sometimes the best comment is no comment; and sometimes, some people have to learn it the hard way.
  • comment on a post GA-10 Results Thread over 7 years ago

    I don't know.

    Whitehead suffers from foot-in-mouth disease and most of the fire from the Democratic side has been targeted towards him.

    Paul Broun, other than his father being a former Democratic state Senator down here, I don't that much about. He's been very quiet, which has its merits in regards to campaign strategy.

  • comment on a post GA-10 Results Thread over 7 years ago

    With 30% of precincts reporting, Democrat Marlow has tied Republican front-runner Whitehead with 28.5% a piece.

  • comment on a post GA-10: Election Day over 7 years ago

    Just checking in here from Georgia.

    I've got some e-mails into the Marlow campaign asking them about turn-out at the polling precincts.

    Here's the Secretary of State's election results web page (http://sos.georgia.gov/elections/electio n_results/2007_0619/Default.htm); check in there after 7:30 to get real time election results.

    Cross your fingers, hope Marlow makes the run-off, and be prepared to donate some money if he does.

  • comment on a post 50 State Strategy: Statewide Blogs over 8 years ago

    In regards to Georgia statewide blogs, I'd refer you to two:

    1.)  The Democratic Party of Georgia's blog, "Opportunity for Georgia" (www.opportunityforgeorgia.com)

    -and-

    2.)  "Georgia Politics Unfiltered" (georgiaunfiltered.blogspot.com).  This particular blog is listed on Iowa Gov. Tom Vilsack's "Heartland PAC" website under the "Build the Bench" link.

  • comment on a post Rove to be indicted "this week or early next", over 9 years ago
    At first glance, this seems like the greatest thing ever, but let's wait until we can get some confirmation from more sources before we jump on this.

    I'm gonna sit on this until I'm comfortable with posting this on my blog.

  • comment on a post The Daily Pulse: Blame the Democrats Edition over 9 years ago
    which states the following:

    5. (a) Notwithstanding any other provision of the rules, when the Senate is in session, no committee of the Senate or any subcommittee thereof may meet, without special leave, after the conclusion of the first two hours after the meeting of the Senate commenced and in no case after two o'clock postmeridian unless consent therefor has been obtained from the majority leader and the minority leader (or in the event of the absence of either of such leaders, from his designee).

    This was reported by MSNBC.

  • comment on a post The Daily Pulse: Blame the Democrats Edition over 9 years ago
    I wish much luck and unanimous support to the Senate Democratic Caucus in this fight against this childish power grab by the Republican majority.
  • comment on a post Open Thread over 9 years ago
    The U.S. Senate passed the highway bill, which was the last piece of legislation pending before the showdown on judicial nominees, so now it's time to raise a little hell and encourage the moderate Republicans to join with the Democrats to Vote NO on the Nuclear Option or ABSTAIN.

    Here's their contact info:

    The Honorable Lincoln Chafee (R - Rhode Island)
    141-A Russell Senate Office Building
    Washington, D.C. 20510
    (202) 224-2921

    The Honorable Susan Collins (R - Maine)
    461 Dirksen Senate Office Building
    Washington, D.C. 20510
    (202) 224-2523

    The Honorable Chuck Hagel (R - Nebraska)
    248 Russell Senate Office Building
    Washington, D.C. 20510
    (202) 224-4224

    The Honorable John McCain (R - Arizona)
    241 Russell Senate Office Building
    Washington, D.C. 20510
    (202) 224-2235

    The Honorable Olympia Snowe (R - Maine)
    154 Russell Senate Office Building
    Washington, D.C. 20510
    (202) 224-5344

    The Honorable Arlen Specter (R - Pennsylvania)
    711 Hart Senate Office Building
    Washington, D.C. 20510
    (202) 224-4254

    The Honorable John Warner (R - Virginia)
    225 Russell Senate Office Building
    Washington, D.C. 20510
    (202) 224-2023

  • comment on a post Friday Happy Hour Open Thread over 9 years ago
    Below is the text of the press release that Bill Frist's office put out today.....let's get ready to rumble!!!!

    --------------------------------------------------

    STATEMENT FROM THE OFFICE OF THE SENATE MAJORITY LEADER  

    May 13th, 2005 - Upon completion of action on the pending highway bill, the Senate will begin debate on fair up or down votes on judicial nominations.  As is the regular order, the Leader will move to act on judge nominations sent to the full Senate by the Judiciary Committee in the past several weeks.  Priscilla Owen, to serve as a judge for the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals, and Janice Rogers Brown, to serve as a judge for the DC Circuit Court of Appeals, will be the nominees of focus.

    The Majority Leader will continue to discuss an appropriate resolution of the need for fair up or down votes with the Minority Leader.  If they can not find a way for the Senate to decide on fair up or down votes on judicial nominations, the Majority Leader will seek a ruling from the Presiding Officer regarding the appropriate length of time for debate on such nominees.  After the ruling, he will ensure that every Senator has the opportunity to decide whether to restore the 214-year practice of fair up or down votes on judicial nominees; or, to enshrine a new veto by filibuster that both denies all Senators the opportunity to advise and consent and fundamentally disturbs the separation of powers between the branches.

    There will be a full and vigorous Senate floor debate that is too important for parliamentary tactics to speed it up or slow it down until all members who wish have had their say. All members are encouraged to ensure that rhetoric in this debate follows the rules, and best traditions, of the Senate.

    It is time for 100 Senators to decide the issue of fair up or down votes for judicial nominees after over two years of unprecedented obstructionism.  The Minority has made public threats that much of the Senate's work will be shut down.  Such threats are unfortunate.

    The Majority Leader has proposed his Fairness Rule: up to 100 hours of debate, and then an up or down vote on circuit and Supreme Court nominations.  Further, the Fairness Rule would eliminate the opportunity for blockade of such nominees at the Judiciary Committee.  And finally, it will make no changes to the legislative filibuster.  

    If Senators believe a nominee is qualified, they should have the opportunity to vote for her.  If they believe she is unqualified, they should have the opportunity to vote against her.

    Members must decide if their legacy to the Senate is to eliminate the filibuster's barrier to the Constitutional responsibility of all Senators to advise and consent with fair, up or down votes.

  • on a comment on Open Thread over 9 years ago
    Because it isn't a Michael Jackson or American Idol type story.

    It's more of the same "dumbing down of America" programming that we're being subjected to, which is why I no longer rely on the MSM as my main source of news.

    REAL journalism is on life support and the only thing that's keeping it from being declared dead are blogs like these.

  • comment on a post Pew Typology Study over 9 years ago
    Sen. Robert Byrd is currently speaking on the Senate floor about judicial nominees and he's held the floor for about 30 minutes.

    If you want to know about the great history of the U.S. Senate, then listening to Sen. Byrd speak is the best way to do it.

    I've learned so much just by listening to him for 30 minutes.

  • comment on a post Frist (?) or Rove (?) Kills Senate Deal on Judges over 9 years ago
    After reading kmwray's comments, I was interested in learning more about the rules and procedures of the U.S. Senate, so I did a Google search, and found this great article, that explains the options that Senate Democrats have against the Republican treachery that has taken hold of the U.S. Senate, the world's greatest deliberative body.

    The Rules of the Senate
    What they are, why they matter, and how they'll figure in the filibuster fight.
    By Chris Cillizza

    Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist plans later this month to amend the most richly prized and roundly despised of the Senate's regulations--Rule XXII--to force up or down votes on a handful of judges put forward by President Bush. Amending Rule XXII would effectively abolish the filibuster for judicial nominations. (Slate's Tim Noah argues this week in favor of scrapping the filibuster entirely; Jacob Weisberg heartily disagrees.) Democrats refer to it as the "nuclear option" because, they argue, it would utterly devastate the Senate. Republicans refer to it by the equally loaded phrase "the constitutional option," noting that the Constitution allows the Senate to make its own rules. If Republicans manage to amend Rule XXII, Democrats threaten to retaliate by invoking other Senate rules that would snarl and disrupt the chamber.

    The 43 rules of the Senate, and the thousands of precedents derived from those rules, exercise an extraordinary and peculiar influence over the body. What are the rules? Where did they come from? How are they changed? And why is the fight over Rule XXII such a big deal?

    In 1789, the Senate passed 20 rules to govern itself, a power given solely to it by Article 1, Section 5 of the Constitution. Since that time, there have been seven full-scale revisions of the rules--the most recent of which came in 1979--and numerous smaller changes and amendments. The rules, which cover everything from the language used to swear in new members to the value of gifts senators can accept, can be changed at anytime by a simple majority vote. If there is opposition to the change, a two-thirds vote is needed to end debate (or bring cloture, in Senate-ese).

    Riddick's Senate Procedure, a 1,500-plus-page tome, is the chamber's unofficial bible, offering an authoritative history of rule-making--and -breaking--over the past 125 years. Sen. Robert Byrd, West Virginia Democrat and self-styled parliamentary guru, claims to have read the work cover-to-cover 16 times. The latest revision of Riddick's was released in 1992 by the Government Printing Office.

    In general, most Senate rules and precedents are peripheral to the day-to-day functioning of the body, because both parties waive their requirements in order to speed up the Senate's functioning. For example, Rule IV states that every morning the journal of the previous day's session--an accounting of all the action on the Senate floor--must be read in its entirety. To expedite the already molasses-slow legislating process, both parties agree to waive the reading of the journal through a "unanimous consent agreement." Those agreements, by which all 100 senators agree to parameters for bringing a bill or nomination to the floor, are the backbone of an effective Senate. Usually the result of significant backroom bartering, the agreements often limit debate time or the number of amendments that can be offered for a piece of legislation. UCs, as they are known, have helped the chamber run smoothly since its formation.

    Withholding unanimous consent is the strongest weapon Senate Democrats have should they choose to strike back against the nuclear option. Refusing consent for picayune bits of business such as the reading of the daily journal would effectively grind the Senate to a dead stop, leaving members unable to introduce new legislation until one side blinks. Putting a "hold" on a bill is a common way to deny unanimous consent, and any senator can do that by informing his party leader of his opposition. Democrats responding to the possibility of a nuclear option have said they will not bring the Senate entirely to a halt for any considerable period of time, but rather will pick their legislative battles.

    Rule VI offers the Democrats another potential stalling tactic. It states that anytime the chamber is in session, a senator can suggest the absence of a quorum, or a simple majority. The roll is then called, and if 51 of the 100 members are not on the floor, the senators who are present can stop further debate until enough of their colleagues arrive to constitute a majority. Because there are rarely more than a few senators on the floor at any one time, except during scheduled votes, repeated requests for a quorum would delay legislation for days or even weeks, as well as infuriate senators by forcing them to troop constantly to the floor.

    The Senate rules and precedents have plenty of other quirks. A 1901 order dictates that every Feb. 22, a senator must honor George Washington's birthday by reading his 1796 farewell address to the nation. (Washington never actually delivered the speech but rather sent it in letter form to a Philadelphia newspaper.) A 1905 resolution banned flowers from the floor; the only exception, permitted by a 1983 amendment, are bouquets placed at the desk of a deceased senator on the day he or she is being honored.

    Rule changes are few and far between in the Senate because the votes of two-thirds of the members are needed to end debate and force a vote. The Republicans' nuclear option would be the exception to the rule (ahem). Instead of trying to directly change Rule XXII, a move that could be filibustered by his Democratic opponents, Frist will instead seek a ruling from the Senate's presiding officer on whether filibustering judges is unconstitutional. That judgment would be made by Vice President Dick Cheney, who oversees the Senate during major floor fights. If Cheney rules judicial filibusters unconstitutional--a move that itself cannot be filibustered, according to Ritchie--his decision could be upheld by a simple majority. Traditionally, neither party has fiddled seriously with the rules because of an understanding among senators that even the most durable majority won't last forever. We'll find out soon whether that understanding still holds.

  • comment on a post Frist (?) or Rove (?) Kills Senate Deal on Judges over 9 years ago
    Sometimes you have to give folks enough rope to hang themselves.

    By putting this compromise deal on the table, our Democratic leadership gave Bill Frist enough rope and now, by rejecting the compromise, he's hung himself.

  • comment on a post Mfume Announces Run in MD over 9 years ago
    I'm in Georgia, but I might be convinced to support Kwiesi Mfume, just to get another African-American U.S. Senator.

    I think the U.S. Senate should look like America.

Diaries

Advertise Blogads