For those of you who believe we should rubber stamp this nomination

[still_one]

First they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out -
because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for the communists
and I did not speak out -
because I was not a communist.

Then they came for the trade
unionists and I did not speak out -
because I was not a trade unionist.

Then they came for me -
and there was no one left to speak out for me.

Pastor Niemoeller

[evlbstrd]

1. Filibuster!

This is the perfect time for it. They are on the ropes. Fight them on all fronts.

[DWolper]

10. Why?

Filibuster and the Republican majority just changes the senate rules to ban judicial filibusters. I see no way, by the numbers, that John Roberts will not be on the bench come October. Just the way it is.

[still_one]

12. let them change the rules

eventually the tables WILL be turned

They will NOT always have the majority

[evlbstrd]

15. Because we have to fight all of the battles, not just one.

The Admin has been weakened. If there is any doubt about this nominee at all, fight. Why should we roll over? Because the nominee could be worse? The American people deserve the best candidate possible for the Supreme Court.

[still_one]

20. Agreed, that is the job of the Senate

they better do their job

[renaissanceguy]

34. What the fuck good is it to have the filibuster if we can't

USE IT!!!!!

THINK, people!


http://www.cafepress.com/liberalissues.21326737

[oneold1-4u]

23. A dire necessity

The filibuster is the simple way to put the brakes on, and right now * is just trying to make another fuss for a cover up. It's not going to work because a few republicans are wondering where and when he (*)will desert the ship and leave them up the proverbial creek!

[Sandpiper]

2. You'll have to excuse them

They think that Karl Rove is the magic silver bullet that will be the end of the Republican Party as we know it.

[still_one]

4. The democrats or republicans have NO control over that

It is entirely in the hands of the Grand Jury

[Booster]

21. You're wrong. We think that Dick Cheney is the magic silver

bullet tht will bring an end to this Administration.,

[Zhade]

32. Then they're absolute fools.

The Allies didn't stop fighting on the Western front just because the Russians were kicking the Nazis' asses in the East.

[jonnyblitz]

49. karl rove is invincible. nothing will happen to him.. these people

can get away with illegal wars for chrissake!! a womans right to choose is a bit more up there on my priority list. I don't care if "we don't have the votes" or whatever. :shrug:

[beam me up scottie]

51. Thanks, Jonny.

It's amazing how quickly we've been abandoned by some of our so called allies.

I guess it's easy to sacrifice the rights of others when you're not in any danger of losing yours.

[Sandpiper]

74. None of us are free if one of us is chained

I am a man and will never personally have need of an abortion.

However, autonomy over one's own body is a fundamental right. As such, I'm ready to fight to preserve a woman's right to choose.

[beam me up scottie]

75. Thank you.

It's tragic that not everyone understands that.

[dave502d]

3. Nice post.Thank you. n/t

[jonnyblitz]

5. oh nobody will pay attention to the appeasers among us

trust me. snicker.

[Solly Mack]

6. Precisely!

Keep selling people out until it's you they come for...


Thank you!

[donheld]

7. Rubber Stamp NOTHING

We must fight this!

[ScreamingMeemie]

8. Nominated. Thank you.

[still_one]

9. You must be on the record, otherwise you stand for nothing

[KittyWampus]

11. haven't heard ANYONE say rubberstamp or even imply it.

[still_one]

14. Will some of the posts I have read

imply that get the nomination over quick and lets get back to rove

Patrick Leahey has responded correctly with approximately the following statement:

O'Connor is not leaving for a little while, so we do NOT have to rush this

We must make sure that he is the right choice

[beam me up scottie]

24. Really ?

"id vote for him..."

"lets get back to the fat cherub"

"There's no use fighting this--I agree."

"And it will shock the shit out of the GOP if we do NOT fight it. And then we can get down to getting back on message re ROVE!"

"I think Dems should do their due diligence on the break and call for quick hearings and move on to more important things. This guy is palatable and may surprise the RW."

"Beat me to it"

"This needs a bit of political judo to keep the news on Rove where it belongs. His confirmation hearings should not be allowed to provide a bunch of white noise masking the scandal story."

"He'll be confirmed. Bet the farm on it. Win the fights that can be won."

"Agreed; Go to the mat on the next one; Back to Rove-Cheney Plamegate"

[Solly Mack]

25. And those weren't hard to find either - they're everywhere

:thumbsup:

[beam me up scottie]

30. Fair weather liberals.

The "I got mine" mentality is legion.

[KittyWampus]

45. so is the reactionary screamer mentality.

[beam me up scottie]

46. You mean the ID/creationist twu bewievers ?

Yeah, they're definitely batshit .

[KittyWampus]

43. most of those aren't inferring "rubber stamp" but looking at big picture

and being pragmatic. And your inability to see that says volumes.

[beam me up scottie]

47. Too bad about that Illiteracy thing.

Have someone read them to you, I don't have time today.

[Zhade]

68. Gee, that was easy, eh?

Sad, too. Why do people think they can only fight ONE battle at a time?

With that kind of attitude, we'd still be British citizens.

[ikojo]

76. AMEN! The corporate leaders and the religious

reich don't fight only one battle at a time. They are constantly fighting battles.

[beam me up scottie]

77. With that kind of attitude,

I'm starting to wish I was a British citizen.
They seem to have figured out how to keep religious zealots out of politics and power.

[beam me up scottie]

13. Thank you.

I have no use for those who are willing to sell us out.
You can fight with us or get out of the way.
I will not abandon anyone in order to win.

We will not go back.

[still_one]

16. Perfect example is Bolton

remember when the media said it was a SURE THING

look what a little unity and standing up for what is right did

[beam me up scottie]

17. That's a perfect example.

I can handle losing after a fight.
I cannot handle giving up without one.

[still_one]

18. you and I are definitely on the same page

[beam me up scottie]

19. Nominated.

[Zhade]

69. Damn straight.

Well-said.

[beam me up scottie]

71. Thanks, it means a lot coming from a man. Some women

are too naive or delusional to recognize the threat.
They'd rather trust the right wing army and tell themselves bad things like that just can't happen.

[Zhade]

72. THAT scares me.

Women should know better than to trust rich old white rightwinger men with their freedom over their own body!

[vickitulsa]

22. Wow, first time I've seen such clear division here...

and I hope it doesn't reflect the attitudes of most Dems. What I mean by that is, I hope divisiveness doesn't undercut the clear progress that's being made to dismantle the party in power. One worrisome thing about being progressives who march to our own tunes and decide for ourselves is that it's a little harder to muster up, stand together and keep our focus where it best serves us.

Effectiveness ... what can ya do without it?

Perhaps good multi-taskers should multi-task, while those who are drained by one big battle can make sure no one lets a key issue get inched aside. I can just see the devious ones, the Roves and Libbies, whoever's plotting hottest and heaviest right now, salivating when they get wind of Dems being split over which battles need to be engaged.

I've always been what W has claimed to be: a uniter. I want to see our efforts be effective!

Sometimes "to each his own" can be the downfall of a good thing for a group of good people. But maybe there's a way to keep everyone on track for the crucial victory while not stifling every individual's need to pursue particular skirmishes?

I'm hoping!

[beam me up scottie]

26. I'm sure you mean well

but tonight is not really a good night to refer to women fighting for their reproductive rights as "every individual's need to pursue particular skirmishes".

I don't hear any of us telling the rest to give up the fight to nail them on Rove and DSM.

So why are we being asked to turn in our wombs at the door ?

[Lecky]

29. You are absolutely 100% correct

[wildflower]

27. Thank you

This nomination, once confirmed, is a lifetime appointment that will change the Supreme Court for a generation. What happens or doesn't happen to the executive branch will have no effect on it.

-wildflower

[beam me up scottie]

28. IMO

IMO

If you won't fight for us, you don't deserve to have any rights.

You don't deserve our respect.

You don't deserve to be in this party.

You are not liberals.

You are not progressive.

You are selfish cowards.

And we will not go back

[evlbstrd]

31. To bring back a phrase,

right on.

[beam me up scottie]

33. Thanks.

[Solly Mack]

35. Oh poo! What did I miss?

:)

[beam me up scottie]

36. I reposted it with one modification.

Hey, it's just MHO.

[Solly Mack]

37. Where do I sign?

[beam me up scottie]

38. On top of their pointy

little heads.
:evilgrin:

[wli]

39. no kidding

The way these fascists are going I'm convinced I'll die in a death camp.

[mmonk]

40. Who's rubber stamping?

We have a chance to save our country from the radicals by attacking their weak spot (the investigation). Don't take their bait anymore. Stay focused.

[vickitulsa]

41. Exactly. The vitriol on this topic isn't justified

IMO. It's one thing to disagree with one's teammates; another altogether to turn on them, castigate them, ream them out, tell them they don't belong and invite them to go to the other side.

Even newbies deserve a tiny bit of respect and courtesy, I believe.

Or would you prefer that new talent and energy take the suggestions to leave and contribute all they have to offer to the "enemy"? Doesn't make sense ta me!

Teammates can disagree on strategy and still come together in the fight -- especially when we know more about what's going to develop so we can strategize more intelligently. Kneejerking outselves into a frenzy and devouring our own isn't going to help us make progress.

Don'tcha think? :loveya: :pals: :grouphug: :applause:

[beam me up scottie]

42. If you're willing to abandon your "teammates" when they

are fighting for their rights, you might as well BE on the other side.

Those who are willing to sacrifice my rights don't deserve my respect.

JMNSHO, of course.

[mmonk]

52. Go ahead and play their game

or let People for the American Way and others push awareness while we put our energies at refocusing the public back to the big lies and the investigation (our only shot at derailing their power until 2006 and paving the way to remove them). Raise hell when its time to raise hell in other words or follow their strategy.

[beam me up scottie]

55. I'm talking about the people who don't want us to fight,

and you know it.
And stop acting like we're enabling the enemy by not conceding our wombs, it's disingenuous and insulting.

[mmonk]

57. I'm not disingenuous

Their strategy works only if we follow their lead.

[beam me up scottie]

59. " Their strategy " ?

So you're saying by not fighting for my rights that I'm actually ruining their strategy ?

[mmonk]

61. Quit turning it around

into a "not fighting the nomination" strategy. Of course fight the nomination but don't go fight alone (without making the case to an politically unsophisticated public). Their strategy IS to divert attention away from their activities under investigation by pushing a court nominee fight for the media to cover. I say try to delay the nomination process until both the case is made against the nominee as much as is possible and until Fitz hands down indictments if any focusing media attention on the truth about the scandal.

[beam me up scottie]

62. These are my rights and I don't appreciate

DU members telling me not to fight for them.

WHy are you arguing with me ?
Why did you pick a fight with me if you aren't disagreeing with me ?
Isn't that a "diversion" ?

[mmonk]

63. Actually, I'm not picking a fight

[beam me up scottie]

64. So I guess I misunderstood "Go ahead and play their game"

which was your response to my post to vickitulsa about DU'ers telling us to shut up and lay down.

None of us are telling dems to stop the current fight, we're in it too, in case you forgot.
But we're being told to just accept this nomination.
And I won't do that.
And I would never ask anyone else to do it either.

[mmonk]

66. You can't stop them

by fighting for your rights and getting mad alone. The only way to break republican discipline and stop the nomination is to make bush unpopular with the general public enough to scare them into thinking there are political consequences for them. Keeping media focus on treasongate is the best way IMO as well as fighting when the time comes. I'm not for silencing anyone or for giving in but I'm not going to led by them in the direction they want to take me.

[mtnester]

44. It is now apparent they are coming for the women

you all know that, and if you don't know it you at least sense it.

I spoke with a group of women last night, all from different backgrounds, politically as well as demographically. With the exception of the hard core fundies, which accounted for for 0.3% of our group of about 30, to a nut everyone was deeply frightened and concerned even more than they were yesterday morning.

Deeply.

I cannot verbally convey the concern and fear really. There was almost a palpable scent/tactile aura of fear in the room, and we all knew it, felt it and smelled it.

[beam me up scottie]

50. They act like we just started

to worry about this last night.
Calling us hysterical may seem clever to their buddies, but it's actually ignorant and false.
We have been fighting for our lives since * was installed.
And now they want us to roll over and just let them take away our rights without a fight ?
Who's rights will be next ?

[mtnester]

56. That's right, cause if they take away our rights, there

will be NO rights left. I wish people would realize you have to fight for EVERYONE, because if one "group" loses theirs, in reality, EVERYONE has lost.

[beam me up scottie]

58. And this appointment

is permanent.

Like Justice Thomas' stand on individual rights and freedoms ?
Want to kick him off the bench ?
Guess what ?
We can't.
Now picture two or three Justice Thomas on the Supreme Court.

Don't worry, ladies, don't fight, just let it happen.

[Cocoa]

48. that's a straw man

let's try to have an honest discussion please.

[Walt Starr]

53. You lost the argument with your fist post

You threw out the Nazi card before you even got started.

:eyes:

[Swamp Rat]

54. First they came for the Muslims, then they came for the gays,

then they came for the women...

[vickitulsa]

65. Swampy, you are so cool.

And your graphics do wonders to express a coherent feeling if not a detailed argument. *BG*

I just recoil from what does seem to be bordering on hysterical rants using words like "turning over our wombs." Geez, can't we converse without resorting to ad hominem attacks and attempts at gut-wrenching emotional appeals? Turn over our wombs, indeed! I'll have you know I owned my own womb so thoroughly I chose to have it removed when I was only 23! It was not easy to find a doctor who would consent to doing that back in 1975, but I persisted. I'd already had one "unplanned" child and have suffered my entire life when I allowed relatives to adopt her and they have never let me see her even once in the 35 years since then.

I didn't want to risk even the slightest chance of repeating that catastrophic outcome, and I knew staying on the pill (as it was so much more powerful hormonally than it is now) indefinitely could really cause me health problems I didn't want to risk either. I could adopt, I could help and care for the children of others. I'd find a way to love children. But I would NOT risk another unplanned pregnancy.

It's not hard for me to get personal and emotional about this issue either, you see? I know whereof I speak. I do not believe R v W is in any danger of being overturned, however. No one truly OWNS a woman's womb except THAT WOMAN. How can it be otherwise? The chances IMO are exactly NIL of a return to the days of back-alley, closehanger abortions resulting in the death and injury of many thousands of poor women (or even not so poor women, though usually those can get an abortion in some other country or bribe a physician to perform one, no matter what the law is).

Remember "an orphan or an abortion"? John Irwin opened so many people's eyes. Even Laura has expressed her belief in R v W, hasn't she? Where do we get off implying that this is still a threat? I simply do not believe that it is. And trying to stir up the fears of women (especially if you are not a woman) more than they may already BE stirred by a Roberts nomination is not, in my eyes, a kind thing to do to women. Women should be comforted and reassured that we will NOT let them be returned to the Stone Age. It just isn't going to happen. Frightening half the population out of their wits isn't a good way to express concerns about issues, is it? Really now, is it?

*Sigh* I so much regret seeing the divisiveness continue....

I've only been here a few days, really, and I love you all already. I want to see unity, confidence, determination to prevail in the face of multiple distractions from the neocon control room. They are so desperate in there ... I can just see Karl's and Dick's blood pressure soaring. Condi will survive, no matter what.

Oh, and that reminds me ... has anyone else wondered when General Powell is going to be asked to express his views and concerns to the public? There WERE a few, after all, in that administration who tried to steer the ship of state in the right direction. Failed, but tried.

Hmmm.....

:think: :loveya:

[Swamp Rat]

67. Welcome to DU!

Thank you for the compliment, however, I plan on stirring the pot quite a bit.

"Women should be comforted and reassured that we will NOT let them be returned to the Stone Age." - That is why I continually express my solidarity with women and women's issues, though there are many people actively trying to take away women's right to choose as we speak.

"It just isn't going to happen." - I hope not, but apparently we are headed in that direction.

"Frightening half the population out of their wits isn't a good way to express concerns about issues, is it? Really now, is it?" - I disagree. Americans should be scared out of their wits right now. We have yet to feel the consequences of an illegal war and the systematic dismantling of the U.S. Constitution... there are some really bad things headed our way, but we can stop our decent into the abyss before it is too late.

[vickitulsa]

73. Aw Swampy, that's not stirring the pot, that's being downright

RATIONAL! :D

And it gets my attention in a big way. Clearly there are some folks here who know things I don't know. But I'm not a sheeplet, either, and I do want to learn what threats I'm unaware of and how serious they are. I can discuss issues all day long with someone who disagrees 180 degrees with me, as long as civility rules the day and both sides can listen and be reasonably courteous. It's the ad hominem attacks that lose me very quickly.

I'll opt out of this discussion now since Beamer is gonna have a heart attack if I don't shut my mouth, and I'll go do some of that research Beamer suggests I need to do. Can't hurt, for sure. Only those who recognize they still have something to learn can grow wiser.

But this way of putting your disagreement with me, Swampy: "We have yet to feel the consequences of an illegal war and the systematic dismantling of the U.S. Constitution... there are some really bad things headed our way, but we can stop our decent into the abyss before it is too late." ... Now THAT sounds like wisdom talking!!

It's hard to argue with such a clearly put, coherent statement. Thank heaven for your calm but incisive summary. You've taken the sting out of the attacks of others. Now isn't it strange how that worked? ;)

One more thing before I go. Can you give me some sources for what you see as the gravest dangers we face in the near future? Even if it's your own writings or brilliant graphic commentaries. I've already checked out many of your graphics and must say it's hard to get enough of them! Nothing eases the tightness in my chest that signals anxiety under attack like LAUGHTER! I can laugh at the sorry state of affairs while at the same time taking the threats VERY seriously. The laughter just helps the BP drop to a level where *I* won't have a heart attack. Too much abuse in the past, can't handle the name-calling and whuppins, 'specially from people who don't even know me......

Thanks Swampy. You restore my faith in civil discourse. And already you've achieved your goal if it was to alert me to unseen and unexpected dangers ahead.

[beam me up scottie]

78. Sorry, if you want a touchy feely group huggy kind of thread,

don't pick one that's about women's rights.

Most of us take this seriously and don't have time to babysit potential offendees.

I have many, many friends here and I didn't get them by being offensive.

But then again, none of them ever made silly little school-girl comments about me in a hot button thread.

[beam me up scottie]

70. It's very obvious which people don't worry about women losing

their reproductive freedoms.

"I do not believe R v W is in any danger of being overturned, however. No one truly OWNS a woman's womb except THAT WOMAN. How can it be otherwise? The chances IMO are exactly NIL of a return to the days of back-alley, closehanger abortions resulting in the death and injury of many thousands of poor women (or even not so poor women, though usually those can get an abortion in some other country or bribe a physician to perform one, no matter what the law is)."

NIL, huh ?

I think I'll listen to the professionals and activists at NOW, NARAL, PPFA and other women's rights organizations since you obviously have no idea what the hell you are talking about and are the one who is basing her opinion on her emotions.

You are seriously delusional and I suggest you educate yourself before criticizing members of this board.

OH, and I'm going to use your post as an example, thanks.

[ArkDem]

60. I'll tell you this, If no one else will filibuster, I will!