Obama to support the filibuster

[Mass]

He said he will on ABC.


However, he was far from supportive and expressed himself in such a way that it looked as if he was not. Not sure who he was blasting exactly, but it does not help,

He made several remarks on how the Democrats in the Senate were not doing the reight thing, talked about over reliance on procedural maneuvers. I guess Kerry would agree on that, however, he presented it in a way that seemed as if he thought that the senators that were pushing the filibuster were not doing so.

[ProSense]

1. Excellent news. Thanks! n/t

[_dynamicdems]

2. Good lord! He's not overflowing in enthusiasm, is he?

Ah well, at least he's made the right decision.

[wisteria]

3. Good lord, I can't believe it is so difficult to get our elected officials

to do the right thing. I am happy he is reluctantly on board though.
IMO, Reid should have given this matter his up most attention, instead he seemed to just ignore it and let the committee handle it. He was very uninvolved in it all.This should not of had to be Kerry fight.
This is more about following DLC recommendations for a 2006 win and less about what we stand for and how we should be protection the public.

You know, we may win some elections because people are mad at Bush and the Republicans, but that still does not help our party in the long haul. We still don't stand for anything according to the American public.

[whometense]

4. From what I saw this morning

(and I didn't see everything) it looks like the repugs are in stage two of their anti-filibuster strategy.

Stage One: slime Kerry

Stage Two: it's not happening

Seriously, they seem to have the whole issue on Ignore.

[Mass]

5. Biden is on for one vote against cloture.

[Inuca]

6. Yes, which together with...

... Obama's reluctant comments was quite distressing. Biden was worse than Obama, who was pretty bad himself. Did not smile once, and seemed tense and uncomfortable. WTF is this "ONE vote against cloture"??? Not that it matters in terms of numbers, I guess, it is unlikely cloture will fail (please excuse my pessimism)so objectively speaking I guess it is good to have his vote, as well as Obama's. But the way they both talked about this in the half minute of their respective interviews that they were allowed (or willing) to address the issue made the whole thing sound like an exercise in futility. Bad. Thanks for the opportunity to let some steam off.

[whometense]

9. Go right ahead.

It's their version of tightrope walking.

My 2 cents? Obama's nervous about getting labeled a big bad liberal - "centrist" cred seems to be important to him. God knows why - he's so popular he can afford to go out on a limb for something he believes. You'd think.

And I think Biden's pissy because Kerry, by getting out in front on this, has made a good case for himself to the liberal dems - not that Biden would ever have a chance in hell to capture the liberal primary voters (don't see how Hillary ever could, either). Kerry's outspokenness has boxed them into a corner and they resent it.

Too f***ing bad. They all had their chance to lead on this - esp. the judiciary dems. If they didn't step up, is that JK's fault? I believe he hung back as long as he did so as not to step on the toes of anyone on Judiciary.

[ginnyinWI]

17. Well he can just be pissy then, because it's true.

Kerry had the boldness to lead on this, so Biden can just lump it. Biden doesn't have the leadership skills needed.

As for Obama, I really didn't like his comment about how the people should speak, but do it through elections! That's the same as saying that the party in power gets ALL the power, and the minority party has to just shut up and let them do "whatever", even if it is a lifetime appointment to the Supremes! Uh-uh, I don't think so--Dem senators have the right to fight for their principles.

[europegirl4jfk]

7. Yeah, he was on Blitzer earlier and less than enthusiastic.

He will vote no on closure but thinks it was a very bad idea to call for a filibuster. I guess these Dems are really mad at Kerry. :cry:

[karynnj]

15. Do you think Biden realises that any chance he ever had

of winning a nomination died with his idiotic questioning of Alito? Even Imus has sounded shaky on his support - and I think he may have been the only one impressed.

It is good that he's a no now.

[wisteria]

44. Did Binden actually make the implication that it was a very bad

idea. I like to know why he thinks it was.

[whometense]

8. And I suppose we

ought to be filled with gratitude?

Thanks a bunch, Joe.

[karynnj]

10. Obama's complaint that they should have started it earlier

based on principles (and that they should win elections) was true but unhelpful. The truth is that the judiciary committee, by and large, did a poor job. Kerry even admitted that they weren't good on "this week" last week.

The biggest problem I have is that Obama contrasts "Procedual maneuver" and "principles". You CAN use pocedural maneuvers to act on principle, which is exactly what Kerry and Kennedy are doing. Can we get examples from the civil rights movement where this was also the case?

As to the timing, no one not on the judiciary committee was allowed to speak on the Senate floor before the committee vote - because Frist said so. Kennedy could probably have raised the issue earlier but may not have had much support. In Kerry's case, he was out of the country till a week ago last Thursday - he said from Israel that he needed to review the hearing before saying how he would vote on Alito. He then said very clearly he was voting against him on Sunday (this week). He and Kennedy then called for a filibuster at their Wednesday caucus.

The key problem is that Kerry should not have had to lead this. The people who should have didn't. I assume Kennedy looked for support on the judiciuary committee and with Reid. Reid leading it would actually have made it easier for the red staters - someone on GD-P mentioned that in one of the red states, Alito proponents were running ads asking their Senator to say no to the liberal MA Kennedy-Kerry led filibuster.

As to principles, Obama should read Kerry's Friday speech - he is speaking principles and he needs them spread. Obama COULD have explained Kerry's principles in leading it or his own in voting for it. That, not keeping his powder dry, would help. Obama could learn from Kerry's life that you can stand up and still win. Obama has years before he runs - this little stand couldn't stop him.

[Inuca]

11. That's one thing...

...that keeps bugging me. I might have already mentioned it, I do not remember. I could not follow enough on the committee hearings, but from what I did follow + heard in the news, I was eft with the distinct impression that they botched the job. WHY???? Many good people in that committee, what the hell happened?!?!?

[Island Blue]

21. I think JK agrees with you Inuca

He said in so many words last week on Stephanophilis' show that he didn't think that all of the questions that needed to be asked were asked. Biden drives me up a wall - he seemed much more interested in hearing his own voice and being "clever" than asking tough questions.

[karynnj]

30. I wonder how Biden took Kerry's admission that the committee

didn't do a stellar job? Out of all the Democrats, he was by far the worst.

[MH1]

36. Well, JK didn't say that.

He was asked about it and said something like "that's what I've heard." He didn't say he agreed with it, nor disagreed. He did say he'd been out of the country and didn't see the hearings and was catching up on everything.

I thought it was a pretty tactful response, under the circumstances. Biden shouldn't be upset with him, because his performance has been widely trashed, and Kerry was very low-key about it.

[karynnj]

43. Kerry was very tactful but I took his "that's what I've heard" and

the expression on his face to mean that he didn't want to say they were awful but they were.

[ProSense]

46. Kerry made it clear that the

hearings fell short in part because Alito wasn't forhtcoming.

There are consequences to this nomination that I do not believe all the American people got out of the hearings because the hearings did not answer questions.

And he wasn't forthcoming.


First the smear against Kennedy after someone filed a complaint:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=2381272&mesg_id=2381333


Then Alito provides more information after that story comes out:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=2381408&mesg_id=2381408


Obviously it was an important piece of information for him to go out of his way to provide it after being called out about it.

How can anyone make a reasoned decision about this man without all the fact?

[whometense]

12. Exactly so.

The key problem is that Kerry should not have had to lead this. The people who should have didn't.

Everyone who is criticising this because of the timing is full of it for this reason. Kerry did the honorable thing by waiting to see if one of the others would step up (as I said in my other post, I assume he and Ted have been discussing this all along). But they didn't.

[Mass]

16. Absolutely. The amazing thing is that kos reports that Durbin was

claiming a whip count of 37 for the filibuster before the Committee vote.

37 votes and they do not try a filibuster. What was Reid waiting? It is clear that the fight would be a lot easier if Reid had been squarely behind that.

[ProSense]

18. If Americans are not convinced about Alito and a significant number

of them oppose him as the polls (CNN, FOX, CBS) show, why are they so quick to give up the fight?

That to me is the question.

[saracat]

22. I don't trust Reid. I never have.

His bankruptsy vote did it for me. This just confirms my bad opinion. He should NOT be Minority Leader. And he shouldn't be letting any Senator dis the filibuster. It is his job to unite them. He doesn't really want this filibuster because he has his own agenda.

[karynnj]

25. So Broder was talking out of his hat when he

said something like "it will be the 2 MA senators making speeches and being followed by some small number of Senators". They only needed to pick up 4 - and that was after a pretty poor hearing and letting the media spin everything. (Mrs. Alito's crying had to be the frosting on the cake. I remember how thoughtful they were about the things Kerry's daughters and Teresa had to hear.)

[Inuca]

24. Absolutely agree, but...

.... it still implies a significant fracture within the caucus, with Kerry (and most likely Durbin + others) on one side, and Reid on the other. NOT a good thing at all. I am ambivalent about Reid, he grew on me, and I find his various tactics and subtle manipulations, to the extent that I understand them, intellectually appealing and often quite effective. On the other hand.... I disliked the famous agreement of the 14 from the very beginning. I was hoping that there was something there that I did not understand, because the way I saw it the Dems either were tricked into giving quite a lot away for practically nothing, or were simply afraid of the nukular thingy (and maybe rightfully so, I don't know) and accepted a semi-honorable way out of the impasse. If the 7 dems signed on that without Reid's OK, he didi not do his job right. 7 out of 44 is pretty high percentage. Anyway... I am rambling... frustrating... I have work to do, and cannot put my mind into it.

[karynnj]

13. Elenor Cliff really showed her colors on the McLaughlin group

Her comment was "This is Kerry starting his 2008 run, trying to get the liberal base" Imagine if an earnest Hillary had made Kerry's Friday speech and spoken up in the Dem caucus. Cliff would have been praising St Hillary to the rooftops. One of the Republicans added that Hillary joined later, but Cliff didn't respond.

[whometense]

14. I saw that too.

I keep wondering, what would the reaction have been from the "liberal media" if, say, Feingold had stepped forward on this?

[ginnyinWI]

19. I've crossed that show off my "must watch" list, actually.

I'm tired of her snark, and of course the whole show is just a weekly food fight. :boring:

[whometense]

20. Good idea.

It was particularly bad this week, with them all shouting over each other for nearly the entire half hour. Gave me a headache.

[karynnj]

27. This one was more so than any I have ever seen.

Primarilly on the Plaestinian elections. Zuckerman was screaming for most of the show. The neo-con idea of spreading democracy is on pretty shaky ground and I think some of its proponents are seeing that it has backfired.

[demdiva]

23. Obama Spoke Out More Against the Democratic Leadership

I just re-watched Senator Obama on This Week (gotta love TiVo) and I don't think that Senator Obama was as much against Senator Kerry & the filibuster as he is against the lack of democratic leadership on this and other subjects.

Senator Obama is supporting the filibuster because he agrees with Senator Kerry on the vote and on the issue, but he realizes that the democrats, overall, have not explained to the American people why they are taking this extraordinary step. Senator Kerry, of course, HAS spoken out about the importance of the Alito vote.

In addition to being critical of the lack of democratic leadership, Senator Obama was critical of Senator Reid and his leadership, and, he outright dodged a question on a disagreement with Senator Reid drawing partisan lines where there should be bi-partisan cooperation (Abramoff related reform).

I'm hoping if Senator Obama decides to pick a fight with anyone it will be with the democratic leadership. Who thinks Obama will win?

[Inuca]

26. On second thought...

.... my first reaction to what Obama said was quite negative. But thinking some more of it (no TiVo here), I may have over reacted.

"Senator Obama is supporting the filibuster because he agrees with Senator Kerry on the vote and on the issue, but he realizes that the democrats, overall, have not explained to the American people why they are taking this extraordinary step"

I think your quote above is a good summary of what seems to be his position. He just exuded unhappiness about the whole issue.

Edit to add: HI! :hi:

[demdiva]

31. Understandable

I'm big supporter of both Senator Obama and Senator Kerry and I completely understand your reaction because I had to go back to see what Senator Obama was really saying.

Part of the problem was that George Stephanopolous brought Kerry/Kennedy into the question, but Senator Obama reframed the question to speak about all democrats and the lack of democratic leadership. I think that Senator Obama was just trying to play both sides of the fence and to put forth his typical bi-partisan rhetoric, but I was frustrated that he didn't make his position clear as well.

George Stephanopolous also made a comment that Senator Obama's support of the filibuster was luke-warm and reported rumors about Senator Obama's behind-doors position about the filibuster, which made it seem even more like he was against the filibuster. But Senator Obama did say that he would support the filibuster.

[karynnj]

28. I'm with you

Also it would be great if Obama - who taught law at the University of Chicago - added his voice to Kerry's. I think he might be surprised at the difficulty of getting a forum to communicate that to the people. Obama has been a superstar because he was utterly fantastic at the convention. The question is would he have more success getting to Americans on this issue than Senator Kerry.

[Mass]

29. I think you may be right,

However, in this case, Obama needs to learn how to speak on the media. What he said is interpreted as an opposition to Kennedy and Kerry in most media and as an agreement with Reid and Biden.

[demdiva]

32. Agreed

I was also frustrated that his position was unclear

[Mass]

33. Kerry said thank you to Obama

I think a large part of the issue is a problem of framing. Kerry, probably more than anybody else, understand the problem of having what you say distorted by the media.

http://www.sunherald.com/mld/sunherald/news/politics/13743747.htm

Kerry, who worked through the weekend to get other Democratic senators to join the filibuster effort, welcomed Obama aboard and praised him for "taking a stand on principle."

"It's not easy, but it's important for our country," Kerry said in a statement.

In his television appearance, Obama did not reconcile his views over the filibuster. Spokesman Robert Gibbs denied a Chicago Tribune request Sunday to interview Obama but said the senator decided to join the filibuster effort because he believes Alito "would be a bad addition to the Supreme Court."

[demdiva]

34. Thanks!

I like that Senator Kerry heard the heart of Senator Obama's message. Great article!

[Inuca]

37. Very nicely put...

... and probably true "Senator Kerry heard the heart of Senator Obama's message"

[Inuca]

35. That whole article...

... is pretty depressing. Back to this morning's mood :-(

[ProSense]

38. That's the key point

Obama believes Alito "would be a bad addition to the Supreme Court."


It may be inexperience, but this is not a matter of disagreeing on the means to stop Alito: the filibuster is the only option and it's worth the best effort. What's up with giving up? When did the response to an attack become surrender because a loss is inevitable.

When Frist said that this is the liberals worse nightmare, that should have been a signal that the Republicans are up to no good.

[MH1]

39. Welcome to DU, and to the John Kerry Group!

:hi:

And thanks for the informative post. I am glad that the real story is better than the spin the media puts on it. But then I am not surprised at that.

[demdiva]

41. Thanks to those who welcomed me!

I've actually been on here before with a different screen name, but only a couple times. I'm looking forward to posting a lot more :)

[globalvillage]

45. Welcome demdiva!

Great to have you here.

[demdiva]

40. I think this article on Obama's appearance is accurate

http://abclocal.go.com/wls/story?section=local&id=3856735

January 29, 2006 - To more effectively oppose Supreme Court nominees in the future, Democrats need to convince the public "their values are at stake" rather than use stalling tactics to try to thwart the president, said Sen. Barack Obama, who opposes Samuel Alito's confirmation. "There is an over-reliance on the part of Democrats for procedural maneuvers," he told ABC's "This Week."

But Obama joined some Democrats, including Minority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada and Charles Schumer of New York, in expressing his unhappiness with the filibuster bid. "There's one way to guarantee that the judges who are appointed to the Supreme Court are judges that reflect our values. And that's to win elections," Obama said.

"I think a filibuster makes sense when you have a prospect of actually succeeding," Biden said on CNN's "Late Edition." "I will vote one time to say to continue the debate. but the truth of the matter" is that Alito will be confirmed, he said.

So . . . what exactly IS Biden's position? It sounds to me like lots of democrats are trying to play both sides of the fence on this one.

[demdiva]

42. Lowering Expectations

I also think a lot of the democrats are using the common political tactic of "lowering expectations". Obama, Biden, even Kerry, have all supported the filibuster, but have told the public that they should not expect the filibuster to succeed. At this point, it's more about fighting the good fight.

[politicasista]

47. Hi demdiva!

:hi: