Senate confirms Owen for circuit court

[SW FL Dem]

http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/05/25/judicial.nominees/index.html

Has received 51 yay votes so far. Voting is still going on, no final tally or roll call available yet

CNN reports final vote 56- 43 in favor of Owen.


Edited to add link and headline

[dave29]

1. Congress is a bad judge of judges n/t

[whistle]

2. Its on C-Span2 now but no tally on the screen

[freedom_to_read]

3. so 3 Reps. voted against her?

at least that's something

[alcibiades_mystery]

5. No it's not

It's nothing.

[SW FL Dem]

6. Not sure

The vote was still ongoing. CNN just reported that she had received the 51 votes necessary to be confirmed. We'll have to wait for a final count and list of the roll call votes.

[freedom_to_read]

7. I see

thanks for the update

[cal04]

4. CNN headline

Senate approves Judge Priscilla Owen for 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, ending protracted fight over her nomination. Details soon.

http://www.cnn.com/

[SW FL Dem]

15. The linked story doesn't say she has the votes

It only says the voting is underway.

[placton]

8. And look at the CNN headline

The "compromise" is a big win for the GOP. This nice looking fascist lady (can you say "Eva Braun"?) is finally taking her seat - and the George-meister is lookin' good. Another win for the Dems - not.

[Teaser]

9. Brown will likely get the boot.

We know one is getting the boot as a show of force. I assume it's Brown.

[Demit]

77. Hope so. I read a critique that the 5th Circuit is a lost cause anyway

Like the 4th, but Brown could do real damage. Oy, what a situation.

[BlueManDude]

10. When does the good part of "The Deal" start?

[earthside]

20. Indeed ...

... that is a good question!

When does the 'good part of the deal start?'

It never will.

Check out the two links to analysis that I put on my web site:
Earthside.com

[BlueManDude]

46. We "retain the right to have the GOP 'go nuke" on our asses whenever

they freaking want".

Never been a SC fillibuster - never will be. As I posted yesterday Clarence Freaking Thomas made it through a Dem dominated Senate with more baggage than a Coach warehouse.

[AlGore-08.com]

79. Yes there has been a filibuster of a Supreme Court nominee

Abe Fortis. The filibuster caused Johnson to withdraw his nomination.

[donsu]

11. how disgusting

thank you dems for being stupid cowards

[freedom_to_read]

17. I'm not sure what you would have them do?

If there had been no compromise, then the "nuclear option," Owen gets confirmed, filibuster is lost... when SCOTUS nomination comes up there's nothing we can do.

Under the compromise, Owen gets confirmed, Dems retain the right to filibuster when SCOTUS nomination comes up.

I agree it sucks she got confirmed, but should we have fallen on our swords for this?

[RaleighNCDUer]

33. Of course, if we should dare to fillibuster SCOTUS

they'll just nuke us then.

When we compromise with the repugs, we lose. Period.

[freedom_to_read]

41. if they nuke us then

it will be a much bigger deal to the public. SCOTUS nominations get huge press compared to this.

the way things are right now, we are going to lose no matter what. our only choice is whether we lose big or at least force a little sunshine on what's happening.

it's not pretty, but politics never are.

[donsu]

82. "the public" doesn't pay attention to what congress does, the public

pays attention to car races, sport shows, T and A shows.

[freedom_to_read]

85. pretty much

but if there is ANY chance of the general public paying attention, it will be at a SCOTUS nomination hearing.

[For PaisAn]

67. YOU got that right

"When we compromise with the repugs, we lose. Period."

The Dems just delayed the inevitable. The repugs get 3 of their judges confirmed, don't have to go nuclear right now and can save it for when it really counts for them, for a SCOTUS vote.

This is not a win for Dems at all.

[geomon666]

35. Uh...no

Under the compromise, Owen gets confirmed, Dems retain the right to filibuster when SCOTUS nomination comes up.

No they don't. If the Dems filibuster again you don't think the repubs will push for the nuclear option again? And then what another 'compromise'?

[freedom_to_read]

45. see 41 above

[LibDemAlways]

44. The repukes gave the Dems nothing.

The "right" to filibuster is meaningless since the repukes still reserve the "right" to invoke the "nuclear" (or as they are now calling it "constitutional") option. It would have been better to force them to go through the process of changing the Senate rules in a naked power grab to get their neanderthals confirmed rather than bending over and allowing them to do it anyway within the rules. Either way it's a game of "Heads, I win. Tails, you lose."

[freedom_to_read]

53. not quite accurate

The 7 republicans who signed the letter agreed not to invoke the nuclear option during the 109th. I think if Frist tries to invoke it he will have to overcome serious opposition from these guys, who have put their reputations on the line by signging the letter of understanding.

Look, I'm not saying it's pretty. But if the Repubs try to go nuclear again, for SCOTUS, it will be a bigger deal.

[LibDemAlways]

59. The 7 repukes may have agreed, but

Frist's "X" appears nowhere on that document. He didn't agree to anything and will stop at nothing. I'm sure he'll lose no sleep worrying about McCain's reputation and the reputations of the rest of those signers.

[freedom_to_read]

63. but Frist will still have to overcome the 7

if they don't support the nuclear option, there's no way he can get the 51 votes for it.

[howmad1]

84. Overcome the seven?

You gotta be kidding. Six of the seven voted to confirm. Stop dreaming. :(

[freedom_to_read]

86. big difference

between confirming a nominee and voting for the nuclear option.

[AlGore-08.com]

81. They agreed as long as any Dem filibuster seemed reasonable to them

as individuals. The agreement is in place only as long as each of them wants it to be. Filibustering for political reasons - - i.e. a judicial nominee is a far right wing nut like Owen or worse - - would be grounds for the GOPers to break the agreement, according to at least one of the signers.

[freedom_to_read]

87. yes that's true

the agreement is ambiguously worded. we'll have to see what happens when Pryor comes up. seems like it will be sooner rather than later.

[BlueManDude]

51. make them show themselves for the fascsist freaks they are

what's the difference? make the "gop moderates" vote for extremism that's what you do.

[chalky]

83. What you just described is NOT a "compromise". What you described is

extortion.

[freedom_to_read]

89. perhaps but I repeat the question

what would you have them do?

they are over a barrel, and in the minority.

[getmeouttahere]

12. Another dark day for America....

welcome to Jesusland, folks. The republican time machine continues to roll us back to the 50's...the 1850's!!!

[Ysolde]

13. How is this a win?

We agreed to give the bully our lunch money if he wouldn't beat us up, so he gets the lunch money and kicks us in the back.

This sucks!

[freedom_to_read]

26. who said we could win this?

There was never the possibility of a win. This is a loss, but not as bad as it could have been (nuclear option).

[ClintonTyree]

62. And you know that.....how?

How do you know what the final outcome would be of a fight that was never fought? Conjecture, that's all you have.

If JUST ONCE, the Dems would have engaged in a knock down, dragged out fight for the soul of America there may have been a different outcome. We could have brought business to a halt in the Senate and forced the Pukes to capitulate from their radical position.

As it is, we'll never know because the weak leadership of our party ran from another fight. Some times you have to get bloodied to WIN a fight. Compromise is NOT always the best solution.

[freedom_to_read]

68. 3 things

1. I'm pretty certain the 7 dems who signed on to this compromise would not have done so if they had the numbers to defeat the nuclear option. They didn't.

2. What's the point of having a knock down drag out fight for the soul of America if the press won't cover it? If they're going to have the fight, they should have it when SCOTUS comes up and the spotlight is really on the Senate. (You and I may think this whole thing is already on the forefront of everybody's mind, but that's not the case...)

3. politics is compromise. even moreso when you negotiate from a position of weakness, which is where we're at right now. I seriously doubt playing the obstructionist card would help shore up Democrats image with the general public. Sorry, but there is no "win" for us, unless we win more seats in 2006, THAT's the big picture.

i agree with your sentiments, believe me I do, but I think we need to be realists about this. what's the point of rending our garments and heaping scorn on our Senators? we just need to keep fighting for what we can.

[rodeodance]

14. 51 votes for her--closer than I thought (per your post)

[rodeodance]

16. than means 6 repugs jumped ship (right)?

[SW FL Dem]

22. Not necessarily

The voting is still going on. At this point, she has the votes necessary for confirmation.

[etherealtruth]

18. Thank God .... We NEED more corporate protections ...

.. and LESS individual rights and protections

:sarcasm:

[derby378]

19. Way to go, Lieberman - you really screwed us over

Now we're stuck with Owen, and James Dobson is wetting himself with joy.

[rodeodance]

21. so, when will cspan put the tally up for c. sake!!

[rodeodance]

24. you are right-the cnn headline does not say she won (yet)

http://www.cnn.com

Updated: 12:21 p.m. EDT (16:21 GMT) May 25, 2005

After 4 years, wait nears end for Owen

[getmeouttahere]

32. Wasn't Dobson hopping mad just yesterday?

[ClintonTyree]

65. In public, yes...

in private, he's probably jacking off to jesus he's so happy.

[The White Tree]

92. Or ......

beating his dog with joy, take that whichever way you want.

[Nordmadr]

23. It isn't 60 votes to confirm? or was that 60 votes just to end the

filibuster? I'm confused. Isn't that what the repub's were complaining about? That the vote requirement for judicial nominations had been changed a few years ago to require 60.

Olaf

[rodeodance]

27. 56 to 43 the president will be notified of the Senates action

[RatRacer]

29. That's just to end the filibuster

...if they don't filibuster, the actual confirmation vote just needs a simple majority.

[Nordmadr]

47. Got it. Thanks. N/T

[coffeenap]

25. 56-43 final vote--frist up now re: Bolton

[rodeodance]

30. bolton talk till 6 pm --per frist right now

[freedom_to_read]

31. that means most likely 2 dems jumped

:(

[rodeodance]

36. someone missing or abstained.

[TahitiNut]

56. Inouye is absent and "Not voting"

[dweller]

43. Byrd and Landreau

:(

dp

[SW FL Dem]

48. Where did you see this?

I have been looking for a roll call.

[dweller]

71. roll call not up yet

GD had a thread with DU members reporting from CSPAN

dp

[The White Tree]

94. I'm so disappointed in Mary Landrieu

I was in New Orleans when they had the runoff election for her Senate seat. At her acceptance speach after she one by a narrow marjin she made the following statement, repling to those who had pasted a liberal label on her during the campaign, "We send leaders to Washington, not labels". I thought that was an inspiring line and took heart that she had won. But where is the leadership. She seems to side with Republicans on everything except womans reproductive rights. And that's the one thing they go after her for in the election. A preist in NO just this past week refused to appear at a commencement for a college that was honoring her family just because of her abortion stance.

So she votes for a deal to save the filibuster by allowing nominations to go through that might threaten even that and goes so far as to vote for the 1st of those nominees.

Where is the leadership?

[dweller]

99. now would be a good time

to remind her what you heard and how you felt then, and how you feel now after this vote.

dp

[The White Tree]

101. Problem is I'm not from Lousiana

I did this with ANWR before she voted. I never even received a reply back I think.

[liberal N proud]

28. CSPAN just said she was confirmed

[rodeodance]

34. Bolton as Representative to UN (just the thought of it makes me

ill).

[xxqqqzme]

54. they have to get rid of Boxer's

block of bolton first. Docs requested by committee have not been produced.

[ClintonTyree]

66. She's already capitulated....

said she will not stand in his way. What a great day for Democrats everywhere! :banghead:

[RaleighNCDUer]

61. Bolton at the UN will perfectly represent this administration in all

its bluster and bullying. When * is gone, he's gone.

But we are stuck with these extremist judges for the rest of their lives. And in this system, being approved for one post is 'proof' that they are eligible for any subsequent post -- "If she was deemed good enough for the Appeals bench, how is she now not qualified for the Supreme Court?"

Hitler's control of Germany was not complete until he was able to neutralize the judiciary.

[Itsthetruth]

37. Senate Votes 56 to 43 To Confirm Owen

Will Post Link When Available

[YEM]

38. Does that mean a dem voted for that wretched woman?

[UCLA Dem]

40. Thats what I was wondering.

[sinkingfeeling]

49. 2 Dems that I heard voted for her...Byrd and Landrieu

[ClintonTyree]

70. Landrieu...............

another DINO from the south that rubber stamps everything the bush baby wants. Why the hell doesn't she just switch parties? :mad:

[davidinalameda]

88. and you're letting Byrd off the hook?

can we all say double standard?

[TahitiNut]

52. Byrd and Landrieu voted "Yea" ... Chafee voted "No"

That's the net added of one. Inouye is absent and "Not voting"

[UCLA Dem]

39. Almost straight party lines. Big shocker here.

[ClintonTyree]

50. Great compromise.....

I hope the Senate Democrats are beaming with pride over their great compromise. We now have the wicked witch of the east sitting on the federal bench, for life. :eyes: What a great victory for us!

[underpants]

60. Did the "deal" do away with needing 60 votes to pass?

Sorry I have been out of it the last few days.

[LibDemAlways]

64. Yes.

Seven Dems gave the repukes the right to put three extreme neanderthals on the bench without first changing Senate rules in a naked power grab. In return, we get to keep the filibuster, provided we don't use it.

60 votes would have been needed to end a filibuster. Dems agreed not to filibuster these knuckledraggers, thereby guaranteeing them the 51 votes they needed for confirmation.

Dems also promised not to use the filibuster except in "extreme" circumstances which probably means only if the chimp nominates Scott Peterson to the SCOTUS. Everyone else will have to go through without a fight.

Big win for us. Oh, yeah.

[JerseygirlCT]

42. Anyone find the tally? Or was anyone watching?

I missed it. Wondering if old Joementum left us again.

[Freddie Stubbs]

55. NY Times story:

May 25, 2005
After 4 Years, Senate Votes to Confirm Owen for Federal Bench
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
WASHINGTON -- The Senate on Wednesday confirmed Priscilla Owen as a federal appellate judge, ending the four-year ordeal of the Texas jurist who was thrust into the center of the partisan battle over President Bush's judicial nominations.

The 56-43 vote to appoint Owen to the New Orlean-based 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals was a consequence of an agreement reached earlier this week that averted, for the time being, a bitter dispute over Democratic use of the filibuster to block Bush's judicial choices.

Owen, said Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., "withstood an orchestrated partisan attack on her record."

Democrats had used their filibuster powers four times in the past to prevent a vote on Owen, who they said was too conservative for the lifetime position. On Tuesday, following the filibuster agreement, the Senate overwhelmingly voted to end the stalemate and bring the nomination to a vote.

more: http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/25/politics/25cnd-judges.html?hp=&pagewanted=print

[lazarus]

76. Yeah, there's that "liberal media" again

"the Senate overwhelmingly voted to end the stalemate and bring the nomination to a vote."

Note it says "overwhelmingly". Not "by a near party line vote". Because "overwhelmingly" makes it sound as if just a few loonies on the left were holding up progress.

:eyes:

[Freddie Stubbs]

91. 81-18 is fairly overwhelming margin

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=109&session=1&vote=00127

[lazarus]

100. Ah, I misunderstood

I thought this was about the vote itself.

Either way, the "overwhelming" part still ignores the details behind the vote.

[MN ChimpH8R]

57. This sez it all

:puke::puke::puke::puke::puke:

[second edition]

58. This hurts! It really does!

It was suppose to happen, but it is still sad. I want to know who the one dem was that voted for her. She was going to get in anyway, with the predicable Reps all voting for her. Why was it necessary for this dem to go along with her confirmation? Let me guess, was it Liberman? I suppose I just answered my own question. Who else?

[freedom_to_read]

69. no it was Byrd and Landrieu

And, hey cheer up. It sucks, but this is not the end of the world. Don't give in to despair.

[second edition]

72. Thanks!! n/t

[ClintonTyree]

75. Landrieu....

the DINO from Louisiana that has to keep her bigoted, in-bred constituents happy by rubber stamping everything bush wants. She may as well put an (R) after her name.

[insane_cratic_gal]

73. I eat my own hat then

I was sure the backroom deal would of blocked Owen

Lindsey Graham had said one of the 3 was going to be voted down on a bipartisian vote, I figured it was her.

*eating hat and not happy about it at all*

[freedom_to_read]

74. Brown most likely

that's the scuttlebut I've heard.

If you've got to eat it, I hope your hat is one of those carmen miranda fruit-head things?

[SW FL Dem]

98. I had heard it might be Pryor who wouldn't be confirmed.

I just hope the moderate Reps vote at least one of the nominees down.

[samsingh]

78. too bad.

[BurgherHoldtheLies]

80. Senate Roll Call Vote link...

The official tally:

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=109&session=1&vote=00128#position

[OrwellwasRight]

93. Thanks! nt.

[SW FL Dem]

96. Thanks!

Can't believe Byrd voted yes.

[leQ]

95. byrd was part of that cabal? (eom)

[Zorra]

97. Has "Typhoid Mary" Landrieu ever voted with OUR party on ANYTHING?

Next time she is up for election we should fund a delegation of Democrats to go down to Louisiana and try to get a Democrat nominated to replace her.
:grr:

[ronnykmarshall]

90. As if this wasn't expected.

Yeah Prissy O is a corporate whore, but the bigger picture is that the fillibuster is safe for Supreme Court nominations.

We ARE the minority in the Senate, suck it up. The battles are just starting.