thehill.com— Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) threatened Friday to filibuster any attempt to seat Democratic Minnesota Senate candidate Al Franken next week.
Jan 2, 2009View in Crawl 4
I'm not going to lie - I can't stand Franken (in fact, he's said some things on Air America that made me view him as a Truther), but he won the vote. We have an election system in this country put in place for a reason. You may not like the man - but if he won the vote, he won - and that is that. Filibustering his legitimate nomination just makes the Republicans look like retards.
Here is what I remember: In 2005, the Republican party threatened to SO AWAY WITH the Filibuster, if Democrats challenged one of Bush's appointments. Now, the very same party is threatening to use what they threatened to end!Do you need ANY more proof than this that it is f**king STUPID to vote for a party, rather than an individual?
Franken learned the lesson all thinking liberals learned in 2004 and esp. 2000: never, ever give up, no matter what the pundits scream. If the Supreme Court Five hadn't stopped the recount, we may never have seen two stupid invasions and a complete fiscal meltdown, and scores of other disasters.
Sorry, edit time expired, so reposting with edits:In this case, they actually had time to find the lost and uncounted ballots, and fixed the over- and under-vote and the write-in rejects. According to the media-sponsored recount done in 2001, Gore would have won if such standards had applied to him -- the "overvotes" (name written in AND name checked) gave him the victory. Who knows what would the outcome had been had the entire state been ordered to recount. Apparently waiting until January to finish it properly did not cause Minnesota to collapse into anarchy.No rightist Supreme Court stopping a legal recount to "prevent harm" to the Republican's election this time. Recall the Five delayed the release of the decision for an entire weekend, which granted a recount under different conditions, until only minutes before the deadline was up so that no recount was possible. So utterly, utterly filthy.
@rewinnAck! you used the r-word! Judges, governments, or pieces of parchment paper do not grant nor take away rights. Nevertheless, both the MN election and Prop 8 used the same mechanism. The mechanism is the part being complained about about from two different sides in the two states...and from both sides of the aisle.
@cg4et,I'm a Dem in Maine; I go to our caucuses and even went to the last two Democratic state conventions for President as a pledged delegate. What I will say about our two Republican senators, Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe, is that they tend to think independently of the party line. Collins did vote George Bush's way more than Snowe, but with honest negotiation from the Democratic leadership, either one of them would vote to end a filibuster. I actually like Olympia Snowe a lot and voted for her the last time she came up for reelection. I don't always agree with her, but as a constituent if I send her a letter on an issue I will typically get a reply and even if it is a form letter, it explains her position and why she has that position. Even when I disagree with her I appreciate her explaining her position in an understandable and reasoned way. You can always count on Snowe putting the country and Maine ahead of party politics. Too bad more politicians don't put the country ahead of party politics.
As Absurdist said, Minnesota law required an automatic recount and when the votes are within a certain margin of error, then recounts should take place to make sure the person with the most votes actually gets seated. With every election there are going to be miscounted votes. Most of the time this miscount won't effect the outcome, but when the vote is really close as it was in this case then making sure votes are counted correctly ensures the correct person is seated.The manual recount took place as was required by state law and Coleman lost. He then challenged the results in a court of law, as is his right, and the judges ruled against him. He does have a right to appeal to the state supreme court, but it is virtually unthinkable that they would rule in his favor. The honest truth is, that the only reason Coleman at the encouragement of the Republican party is keeping up his lawsuit is to prevent Franken from being seated for as long as possible to deny the Democrats another vote in the Senate. In the process they are also denying Minnesotans a second voice in the Senate as is their right. Simply put, Coleman is abusing his rights for pure party politics at the expense of the rights of others.
I would agree that the filibuster was a legitimate tool IF those conducting the filibuster were required to actually keep on talking and debating to keep the filibuster going. This would provide a suitable disincentive to filibuster unless it was really important.
Closed AccountJan 4, 2009
I'm not going to lie - I can't stand Franken (in fact, he's said some things on Air America that made me view him as a Truther), but he won the vote. We have an election system in this country put in place for a reason. You may not like the man - but if he won the vote, he won - and that is that. Filibustering his legitimate nomination just makes the Republicans look like retards.
Closed AccountJan 5, 2009
Here is what I remember: In 2005, the Republican party threatened to SO AWAY WITH the Filibuster, if Democrats challenged one of Bush's appointments. Now, the very same party is threatening to use what they threatened to end!Do you need ANY more proof than this that it is f**king STUPID to vote for a party, rather than an individual?
catbellerJan 5, 2009
Franken learned the lesson all thinking liberals learned in 2004 and esp. 2000: never, ever give up, no matter what the pundits scream. If the Supreme Court Five hadn't stopped the recount, we may never have seen two stupid invasions and a complete fiscal meltdown, and scores of other disasters.
catbellerJan 5, 2009
Sorry, edit time expired, so reposting with edits:In this case, they actually had time to find the lost and uncounted ballots, and fixed the over- and under-vote and the write-in rejects. According to the media-sponsored recount done in 2001, Gore would have won if such standards had applied to him -- the "overvotes" (name written in AND name checked) gave him the victory. Who knows what would the outcome had been had the entire state been ordered to recount. Apparently waiting until January to finish it properly did not cause Minnesota to collapse into anarchy.No rightist Supreme Court stopping a legal recount to "prevent harm" to the Republican's election this time. Recall the Five delayed the release of the decision for an entire weekend, which granted a recount under different conditions, until only minutes before the deadline was up so that no recount was possible. So utterly, utterly filthy.
supervepr308Jan 6, 2009
It is a wicked counter-move. Basically, you talk the other side to death and never let a vote happen. Who can't love that???
spritomJan 7, 2009
@rewinnAck! you used the r-word! Judges, governments, or pieces of parchment paper do not grant nor take away rights. Nevertheless, both the MN election and Prop 8 used the same mechanism. The mechanism is the part being complained about about from two different sides in the two states...and from both sides of the aisle.
envirochemApr 27, 2009
@cg4et,I'm a Dem in Maine; I go to our caucuses and even went to the last two Democratic state conventions for President as a pledged delegate. What I will say about our two Republican senators, Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe, is that they tend to think independently of the party line. Collins did vote George Bush's way more than Snowe, but with honest negotiation from the Democratic leadership, either one of them would vote to end a filibuster. I actually like Olympia Snowe a lot and voted for her the last time she came up for reelection. I don't always agree with her, but as a constituent if I send her a letter on an issue I will typically get a reply and even if it is a form letter, it explains her position and why she has that position. Even when I disagree with her I appreciate her explaining her position in an understandable and reasoned way. You can always count on Snowe putting the country and Maine ahead of party politics. Too bad more politicians don't put the country ahead of party politics.
envirochemApr 27, 2009
As Absurdist said, Minnesota law required an automatic recount and when the votes are within a certain margin of error, then recounts should take place to make sure the person with the most votes actually gets seated. With every election there are going to be miscounted votes. Most of the time this miscount won't effect the outcome, but when the vote is really close as it was in this case then making sure votes are counted correctly ensures the correct person is seated.The manual recount took place as was required by state law and Coleman lost. He then challenged the results in a court of law, as is his right, and the judges ruled against him. He does have a right to appeal to the state supreme court, but it is virtually unthinkable that they would rule in his favor. The honest truth is, that the only reason Coleman at the encouragement of the Republican party is keeping up his lawsuit is to prevent Franken from being seated for as long as possible to deny the Democrats another vote in the Senate. In the process they are also denying Minnesotans a second voice in the Senate as is their right. Simply put, Coleman is abusing his rights for pure party politics at the expense of the rights of others.
envirochemApr 27, 2009
I would agree that the filibuster was a legitimate tool IF those conducting the filibuster were required to actually keep on talking and debating to keep the filibuster going. This would provide a suitable disincentive to filibuster unless it was really important.