Wednesday, March 16, 2005

What Democrats Once Said About Filibusters

From NRO's Beltway Buzz via Dan Wismar:
Barbara Boxer – 5/14/97:

"It is not the role of the Senate to obstruct the process and prevent numbers of highly qualified nominees from even being given the opportunity for a vote on the Senate floor."

Dick Durbin – 9/28/98:

"If, after 150 days languishing on the Executive Calendar that name has not been called for a vote, it should be. Vote the person up or down."

Tom Harkin – 1/5/95:

"I do not believe that I as a member of the minority ought to have the right to absolutely stop something because I think it is wrong, that that is rule by minority."

Ted Kennedy – 3/7/00

"The Chief Justice of the United States Supreme Court said: ‘The Senate is surely under no obligation to confirm any particular nominee, but after the necessary time for inquiry it should vote him up or vote him down.’ Which is exactly what I would like."

Pat Leahy - 6/18/98

"If we don’t like somebody the President nominates, vote him or her down. But don’t hold them in this anonymous unconscionable limbo, because in doing that, the minority of Senators really shame all Senators."
What's changed? A Republican is in the White House and Republicans control the Senate.

The Republicans shut down the government at the time, exactly what the Democrats are talking about doing in the Senate, and it came back to bite them. HARD. Go ahead, Democrats, solidify your loser status for a decade...

1:50PM

As Mahatma notes in the comments below, he rips Harry Reid pretty good over his latest comments on this subject over at From the Loonatic Left. Great read and right on target.

Of course, yesterday Mark suggested pacifiers...