The Next Hurrah

Now That's Really Using the Power of the Purse

So  Big Dick Cheney doesn't think he's part of the Executive Branch, as the conventional press has just discovered?  Fine.  Here's one solution:

Rep. Rahm Emanuel, D-Ill., said he would like to amend a spending bill that funds executive operations so that money for Cheney's office and home is put on hold until he clarifies which branch of government he belongs to. Emanuel acknowledged that the move is a stunt, but said if Cheney is not part of the executive branch, he should not receive its funds.

More like that, please.  Stand up to them, ridicule them, use the levers of government against them.  It draws from their power.  Sooner or later the conventional press will see what's going on and maybe, just maybe, concern will spread from beyond the blogosphere (our won EW has been all over this too) and we can force some changes.

And this just in!  VP not part of the Executive Branch?  Neither is President Bush!  Get out that rewrite pen, Rahm!

Notes on the Nuclear Option -- Part XXII

by Kagro X

Recent speculation in both the WaPo and Time have sparked a mini-panic, by positing that Sen. Tim Johnson's medical condition could embolden the Senate Republicans to either make an outright attempt to thwart  the transfer of control of the chamber to the new majority, or at least set themselves up for such a grab should Johnson (or any other Democrat) be replaced by a Republican during the session. Here's how it sets up, in the Time article, by Karen Tumulty:

The incapacitation of South Dakota Senator Tim Johnson has put all eyes in Washington on what is normally a little-noticed Senate vote now scheduled for Jan. 4. It is called the "organizing resolution," and is the bit of internal housekeeping that determines how committee memberships will be allotted between the two parties, as well as who will get to serve as chairman and ranking members of each of the panels. These resolutions traditionally stand until the next Congress, even if the makeup of the chamber shifts to put the other party in the majority, which is why precedent would seem to dictate that the Chamber would stay in Democratic hands, even if Johnson is replaced by a Republican. [...]

With Johnson unable to vote, Democrats still have enough to prevail, with 50 votes (including the two independent Senators, Joe Lieberman of Connecticut and Bernie Sanders of Vermont) to 49 for the Republicans. But Democrats now fear the real possibility that Republicans will filibuster that resolution.

Notes on the Nuclear Option -- Part XXI

by Kagro X

Seventy-something days out from the election, and just in time for the post-Labor Day campaign busy season, the White House is rolling out a slate of five more judicial nominations for the appellate courts. With the elections so close and with Republicans, by most accounts, on the ropes, I'm sure Bush and company will be soft-pedaling the whole affair, steering clear of controversial nominations designed to provoke a fight they can ill-afford.

D'oh!

In a move to satisfy the GOP's most conservative supporters, President Bush on Wednesday nominated five people as appeals court judges, including one whom Democrats have threatened to block with a filibuster.

Notes on the Nuclear Option -- Part XX

by Kagro X

Careening down the highway aboard the Nuclear Option Express, heedless of the possibility of a disastrous collision, it seems certain Republicans have just hit upon the idea that it might be a good idea to take a glance up at the road ahead.

'Nuke' could backfire, say some on right
By Jonathan Allen

Some conservatives are worried that a filibuster-crushing Senate rules change could backfire on their movement, ultimately robbing them of a powerful weapon they have used effectively to battle liberals and centrists in the past.

Oh, you don't say?

Endnotes on the Nuclear Option -- Part III

by Kagro X

If we weren't a family blog, I could have headlined this one "Gang (of 14) Banged! Lindsay Graham F*cks 13 Senators in One Day!"

Word is that CNN is reporting the "Gang of 14" will meet today, presumably to declare the possibility of a filibuster of the Alito nomination dead. That the Gang is getting together to say so is, we must assume, a declaration that the now-infamous "extraordinary circumstances" bar has not been cleared.

But as I've suggested before, perhaps the Senators are looking in the wrong place for their circumstances. What if the guy on the other side of the table is what's extraordinary about the nomination?

Why The Democrats May Not Filibuster Alito

By DHinMI

This morning Diane Feinstein threw a heaping pile of wet noodles over the idea of filibustering Samuel Alito's nomination to the Supreme Court:

"I do not see a likelihood of a filibuster," said Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif. "This might be a man I disagree with, but it doesn't mean he shouldn't be on the court."

She said she will not vote to confirm the appeals court judge, based n his conservative record. But she acknowledged that nothing emerged during last week's hearings to justify any organized action by Democrats to stall the nomination.

Robert Bork also had legal accomplishments that would have warranted his ascension to the Supreme Court, but he was rejected because he was a conservative nut. Alito, by temperament and through his public presentation, is not a lightening rod like Bork.  But there's plenty to suggest that their decisions and to a lesser extent their written opinions would be very similar, so Feinstein's comment isn't very convincing.

I've thought all along there was good case could for filibustering Alito.  Alito is a judicial radical and far from the national mainstream on numerous issues. Polls have shown for quite some time that Americans, even a good portion of those who are either squeamish about abortion or even openly opposed to it, are opposed to placing someone on the Supreme Court who will overturn Roe v Wade and make abortion illegal.  He's clearly infatuated with executive power and disdainful of the law as something that is a living institution that grows to cope with new problems, challenges and ways of life.  And his failure to recuse himself on the Vanguard case would have enabled opponents to demonstrate his ethical shortcoming.  And with his anemic numbers, George W. Bush wouldn't be able to count on much support from the country in ramming through the nomination.

Notes on the Nuclear Option -- Part XIX

by Kagro X

Like a bad horror movie, the nuclear option keeps coming back.

Here's the set-up, courtesy of Hunter at Daily Kos:

Senate Republicans prepared a targeted version of the so-called “nuclear option” yesterday as they tried to ensure adoption of a defense-spending conference report that includes a controversial provision opening the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) to oil and gas drilling.

The tactic promises to make the consensus-based Senate temporarily resemble the majority-dominated House.

Let's take that apart, shall we?

Bill Frist Should Have Read The Next Hurrah

By DHinMI

I warned people not to play poker with Harry Reid.  Why wouldn't Fristie listen?

This afternoon the Senate Democrats, under the leadership of Harry Reid and Richard Durbin (with an assist from the most underrated member of the Senate, Carl Levin) seized control of the chamber and forced the Republicans to do some work.  As Kagro X pointed out long ago, Harry Reid hasn't threatened to shut down the Senate if the Republicans launch the Nuclear Option, he's threatened to use extraordinary measures to make the Senate work on issues of the Democrats' choosing.  It's worth taking a look at the immediate issue at hand in today's dust up, the issue on which the Senate Dems forced the Republicans to work.  But we should also recognize that today's Senate actions took place amid a cluster of potentially monumental events, including the Libby indictment, the Alito nomination and the filibuster and launch of the Nuclear Option it may provoke, planning for dealing with a possible Avian Flu pandemic, recruitment and early positioning for next year's Congressional elections, and the ongoing battle between the parties to gain control of news cycles, with the Democrats increasingly taking the offensive.  The Democrats'  maneuver in the Senate was a brilliant tactical move, and I suspect an important strategic move that will help shape the political environment for the next 12 months.

Boneheads of the Day: The DNC

By DHinMI

OK, we don't have a poll function with typepad, so you will have to commnt to give us your answer. 

The question: Choose the biggest Democratic bonehead(s) of the day

A. Howard Dean
B. The research staff at the Democratic National Committee
C. The press staff at the Democratic National Committee
D. The perennial favorite, all of the above

Is Chris Matthews Spreading Disinformation About Supposed Mafia/Alito Charges by Democrats?

By DHinMI

I know it's been a long time since Scooter Libby was indicted, so maybe Chris Matthews can be forgiven for appearing to have been so willing to be a useful idiot.  Or maybe he's just one of the most gullible people in Washington DC:

MSNBC reporter Chris Matthews today hammered the Democratic Party, claiming it was circulating a document that emphasizes the fact Samuel Alito, President Bush's latest Supreme Court nominee, failed as a prosecutor to win a case against Italian mafia figures, suggesting the issue was highlighted because Alito is an Italian-American.

"I'm sitting here holding in my hands a pretty disgusting document," Matthews told viewers of "MSNBC Live." "This is put out not for attribution, but it comes from the Democrats. They're circulating it; I can say that."

In what he describes as a Democrat "complaint sheet," Matthews says, "The first thing they nail about this Italian American is he failed to win a mob conviction in a trial … way back in '88.

"In other words, they nail him on not putting some Italian mobsters in jail from the [Lucchese] family. Why would they bring up this ethnically charged issue as the first item they raise against Judge Alito?"

The only reason I know about this claim is because I just turned on the television, and he was beginning Hardball with the same claim, that such a document was being circulated by "the Democrats."

I call bullshit.

I'll recant if proven wrong, but I just find such a claim utterly ridiculous.  If true, if some Democratic operative or organization actually thought such a claim would be an effective first salvo against Alito, they should be brought up on charges of political malpractice and eternally banned from Democratic politics.  But it's hard to believe anyone would believe such a charge would be both effective and without a huge backlash.

If such a document were really circulating widely and were viewed credibly as an authentic Democratic document, it's hard to believe that a Google web search and a Google news search would yield only one reference to the supposed document, but the rightwing WorldNetDaily.  It's almost as if someone planted the document--maybe even forged it--and convinced a prominent and gullible member of the national press corps seeking a scoop to believe what was clearly disinformation planted by dark forces seeking to advance the agenda of the Bush administration.

Yeah, I know, that's just crazy talk.

But in the meantime, how 'bout it Chris?  How 'bout telling us how you know that document is legitimate?  How 'bout proving your source didn't play you?  Or are you that convinced that a legitimate effort to tar Alito with insinuations about being soft on the mafia would go only to you, or would only be believed by you?

We'll be waiting.