Daily Kos

Dobson's response

by kos

Mon May 23, 2005 at 07:16:22 PM PDT

Frist's puppetmaster has a statement:
COLORADO SPRINGS, Colo., May 23 U.S. Newswire -- Focus on the Family Action Chairman Dr. James C. Dobson today issued the following statement, upon the announcement by members of the U.S. Senate that a "compromise" had been reached on the filibuster issue:

"This Senate agreement represents a complete bailout and betrayal by a cabal of Republicans and a great victory for united Democrats. Only three of President Bush's nominees will be given the courtesy of an up-or-down vote, and it's business as usual for all the rest. The rules that blocked conservative nominees remain in effect, and nothing of significance has changed. Justice Clarence Thomas, Justice Antonin Scalia, and Chief Justice William Rehnquist would never have served on the U. S. Supreme Court if this agreement had been in place during their confirmations. The unconstitutional filibuster survives in the arsenal of Senate liberals.

"We are grateful to Majority Leader Frist for courageously fighting to defend the vital principle of basic fairness. That principle has now gone down to defeat. We share the disappointment, outrage and sense of abandonment felt by millions of conservative Americans who helped put Republicans in power last November. I am certain that these voters will remember both Democrats and Republicans who betrayed their trust."

(Via Crooks & Liars)
  • ::

Tags: (all tags) :: Previous Tag Versions

Permalink | 302 comments

  •  Dobson (4.00 / 2)

    We are grateful to Majority Leader Frist for courageously fighting to defend the vital principle of basic fairness.

    Eh, to me this sounds like Dobson is feigning just enough outrage for his base, while refusing to eviscerate Frist. If Dobson really were as pissed as he's claiming, why doesn't he annihilate Frist then?

    Swing State Project: Campaign & Election News

    by DavidNYC on Mon May 23, 2005 at 07:14:18 PM PDT

    •  outrage (4.00 / 3)

      Dobson is required to feign outrage at this.  If he were happy, it would be like Brent Bozell saying "gee, I watched CBS every day last month, and it really wasn't so bad."

      So I don't take any comfort in him doing his job.

      by cardinal on Mon May 23, 2005 at 07:16:04 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  he'll go after Frist (none / 1)

      later...but right now he wanted to take an opportunity to complain about the lib-ruls.  

      by mimi9 on Mon May 23, 2005 at 07:16:44 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  meanwhile on RedState..... (none / 1)

        Frist is receiving many grrrrrs and talk of his heir is in the air....
        "You are right on Cornyn, he's green -- but I think in 6-10 years....his conservative bona fides are without question, and I think he is learning some of the nasty back-room ropes.
        Meanwhile, a question, since I don't know Kyl that much.  Is he nasty?  Will he kick some of these RINOs in the cods?  Does he play hardball, will he eat Reid for breakfast, and spit out the exoskeleton?"         and the like...

        To which I responded (as "Bushmaster" {It's a snake! It's a gun! It's 2 Republican treats in One!!"}
        "Can't we dig up Pinochet and clone ourselves a TRULY conservative Senate Majority Leader?"

        Damnit. I just couldn't resist.

        by sooner on Mon May 23, 2005 at 11:22:17 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Hmmm... (none / 1)

      He does have 'Frist' and 'sense of abandonment' in the same paragraph. Lip service, I say.

      It's a neighborly day in this beautywood. Relentless!

      by ablington on Mon May 23, 2005 at 07:16:48 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Dobson's statement (none / 1)

      Makes me think this compromise is a good thing.  

      by Tillie630 on Mon May 23, 2005 at 07:17:20 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  That's what I was thinking (4.00 / 2)

        I haven't digested it all yet, but I do know that if Spongedob Prayerpants is against it, that raises it a bunch in my estimation.

        The avalanche has started. It is too late for the pebbles to vote. -- Ambassador Kosh

        by Omir the Storyteller on Mon May 23, 2005 at 08:53:27 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Agreed... (none / 0)

        I am NOT a fan of this compromise at all (but I do wonder about the machinations that led to it...was Reid beginning to believe that Frist had the votes?), but let them scream this from a mountaintop.

        In our world, a victory is a victory...whether it is  real or simply perceived.

        It is from numberless diverse acts of courage and belief that human history is shaped. - Robert F. Kennedy

        by rygriffin333 on Tue May 24, 2005 at 06:19:36 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Frist is still the Senator from Dobson (4.00 / 2)

      Dobson's wrath will be turned on the 6 moderate Republicans.

      Fine. Let them change parties or face defeat at the hands of the Dobson's pitchfork and torch crowd in the Republican primary.

      Freedom does not march. I saw an invasion. I see an occupation. I don't see a war. "Constant war is not a family value." Cindy Sheehan 8/22/05

      by ex republican on Mon May 23, 2005 at 07:17:48 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  You might say (4.00 / 5)

        That the head of Focus on the Family has given those six a Dobson's choice.

        John McCain's Straight Talk Express runs on fossil fuels.

        by Dump Terry McAuliffe on Mon May 23, 2005 at 08:03:26 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Dobson's choice (lol) (none / 1)

          But then again, two things stand out:

          This Senate agreement represents a complete bailout and betrayal by a cabal of Republicans and a great victory for united Democrats  (Emphasis added).

          It's been suggested that the officers of Bushco lace their public statements with code words aimed at firing up their religious right base (see, e.g., here and here) choosing language that has very specific connotations for the fundie evangelical reader or listener.  

          So it's interesting to look at Dobson's statement in this light, given the potential political fallout of what has happened.

          The "cabal" reference is pretty overt:  It conjures up the image of satan-worshipping, witchcraft wielding, god-hating (i.e. secular) Republicans who conspire with the enemy and betray the savior (Frist or Bush, take your pick).  Seemingly, a warning to the shocktroops to bring these Judases down.

          But the rest of that sentence - "great victory"; "united Democrats" what's that about?  We should not, for a moment, think of it as praise.  So is he simply pouring salt on the wounds of his fundie footsoldiers so that they will redouble their efforts to reclaim lost ground?  And is "united Democrats" a reference to the need to redouble their strategy to divide the faithful from the faith-hating (i.e., secular) Americans and thereby conquer the Democrats (i.e., the secular party), which worked so well in the last election?  

          I have seen the words "great victory" used in  religious contexts to describe a triumph that is ultimately attributable to God (so that people of faith are not tempted to take any credit for themselves).  So perhaps he is reassuring his minions that the Democrat's "great victory" was God's doing -- a form of divine retribution against the evil conspiring Republicans -- and not because the united Democrats (an irrefutable force of evil) actually had the better position in this debacle.  (Because, when you think of it, if God is really running things, how could the Repugs ever lose?)  

          So this is a way of making sure the faithful aren't stopped in their tracks by an unexpected outcome, and don't pause to consider the merits of the opposing argument.     Ever.

          Reality addict - can't get enough of seeing it all clearly

          by writeout on Mon May 23, 2005 at 09:58:43 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  God *is* really running things (none / 0)

            but that is why WE will win, because Dems are doing a much better job at representing Christian values and fulfilling God's mission for the world than Republicans.

            In fact, with the possible exception of abortion (and I mean "possible" since a case can be made that we're morally right on that issue too) there is NOT ONE Rpug party policy that is more consonant with scripture imperatives than the corresponding Dem policy.  I welcome any lurking Repubs to try to come up with one.

            I was so discouraged last week that this almost seems like a miracle.  With apologies to all the people of different beliefs than mine, I've prayed so hard for the future of my country that I have no problem seeing the hand of divine intervention on this.

            Politics is like driving. To go backward, put it in R. To go forward, put it in D.
            Give to Populista's Obamathon 2.0!

            by TrueBlueMajority on Tue May 24, 2005 at 03:59:41 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  I Thought "Cabal" ... (none / 0)

            ...was a code word for Jews. Christian-hating Jews that bake the blood of Gentile children into their matzoh. Or something.

            "Sometimes I wonder whether the world is being run by smart people who are putting us on, or by imbeciles who really mean it." -- Mark Twain

            by JDRhoades on Tue May 24, 2005 at 05:16:57 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

    •  Could be. (4.00 / 2)

      If it's genuine, it's a hell of a message to Republicans, though.

      The "people of faith" are, for the most part, getting their votes. Saad has hardly merited a mention from Dobson through the whole process. If he's going to stamp his feet and cry now, I think he puts a minimum of three more Senate Republicans in the moderate camp he can't influence. And that's a lowball estimate.

      That it's a sham, as you suspect, would certainly be the more sensible political play. But there's no shortage of signs that he's got a tin ear.

      by Kagro X on Mon May 23, 2005 at 07:18:18 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  reminds me of (none / 1)

      crocodile tears

      Resist much, obey little. ~~Edward Abbey, via Walt Whitman

      by willyr on Mon May 23, 2005 at 07:21:43 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  I think he is in shock right now (none / 1)

      Let's see what he comes back with

      The Republicans have a fundamental problem with telling the truth - Howard Dean.

      by NYC Sophia on Mon May 23, 2005 at 07:23:03 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Because First is still Majority Leader (none / 1)

      If Dobson and Frist break up over this, they'll get nothing done.  It's a major defeat for them, but it's even worse if they burn their bridges behind them.

      When you understand why you dismiss all the other gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours.

      by RequestedUsername on Mon May 23, 2005 at 07:24:00 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Sports Metaphor (4.00 / 3)

      Sounds to me like Dobson is giving Frist the dreaded "vote of confidence."  How many times have general managers in sports, when asked by the press about a coach who's performing badly, respond with something along the lines of "He's doing a fine job for us," only to can the guy shortly thereafter.

      by Spideysense on Mon May 23, 2005 at 07:40:49 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  If only... (4.00 / 3)

        Bush had done that with Rumsfeld (a year ago) after Abu Ghraib (sp?)!

        Here's another sports metaphor:

        Frist is the GM and he's up against a "salary cap" with his prima donna player, Dobson, who whines and thinks everything should go his way.  Sure, as a star, Dobson brings in the most $$ for the franchise, but his presence on the "team" is a major drag and is hurting his potential to add fresh blood.  If this keeps up, several of his other players are likely to ask to be traded!  (Let's hope!)

        Social advance depends as much upon the process through which it is secured as upon the result itself. --Jane Addams

        by shock on Mon May 23, 2005 at 08:19:45 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  As a sports fan (none / 1)

          I like the analogy.  

          by Chidem on Mon May 23, 2005 at 08:56:09 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  Dobson = the Kobe Bryant of Politics (none / 1)

          Dobson's behavior reminds me of Kobe Bryant's destructive behavior.

          After the Lakers lost in last year's NBA Finals, he bullied the owner and got him to break up the ballclub. Without Shaq and Jackson, Kobe got his wish, becoming the center of attention at Staples Center. But the Lakers organization paid a heavy price: they didn't even make the playoffs.

          If only the GOP could implode as quickly and spectacularly as the Lakers.

          John McCain's Straight Talk Express runs on fossil fuels.

          by Dump Terry McAuliffe on Mon May 23, 2005 at 09:34:08 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  "The Arsenal of Senate Liberals" (4.00 / 2)

    Love it!

    It's a neighborly day in this beautywood. Relentless!

    by ablington on Mon May 23, 2005 at 07:15:23 PM PDT

    •  Focus on your own family (4.00 / 15)

      and please leave mine alone.

      That is all.

      Except to say that the evangelical and fundamentalist right thrives on losing.  They haven't actually won a whole lot the past 30 years when you think about it.  But for these folks, even when they lose, they win.  It's part of their psyche, part of their identity.  Marginalized victims.  So, they will probabably just spin this to get more support.

      -6.88, -6.72. The truth will set you free. But first it will piss you off.

      by Lucky Ducky on Mon May 23, 2005 at 07:23:32 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  BEENGO! (none / 1)

        agreed. I'm STILL looking for the proof these fascists have EVER swung a congressional race to THEIR candidate in any state in the union.

        examples anyone? and don't just shout out "Santorum!".. I need to see actual stats these idiots can swing an election other than town dog catcher.

        BTW, wasn't the BTK killer one of theirs??

        "Cigna cannot decide who is going to live and who is going to die." -- Nataline's mother

        by Superpole on Mon May 23, 2005 at 07:33:08 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Don't Discount "Dog Catcher" (4.00 / 2)

          You may be right about Congress and other high profile offices, but these guys do enormous damage in school board races around the country.

          This nicely summarizes what's wrong with American political life today. (Source)

          by GreenSooner on Mon May 23, 2005 at 11:13:51 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  School Boards? (none / 0)

            "enormous damage"?? really? ever go up against the teacher's union? HAH HAH HAH!! they rule and I seriously doubt religious wingnuts have much sway over public teachers anywhere.

            but let's get back to the REAL DAMAGE being done by the democrat members of our House of Lords who keep signing the checks for the Hellholes Iraq and Afghanistan, etc. WHEN are they going to stop the madness?

            "Cigna cannot decide who is going to live and who is going to die." -- Nataline's mother

            by Superpole on Tue May 24, 2005 at 06:02:29 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Kansas, anyone? Or Georgia? (none / 0)

              I would consider trying to eviscerate the teaching of science, including evolution (which I consider to be one of the foundational theories of modern biology) to be pretty serious damage.  

              Or trying to single out evolution as "just a theory" in contradistinction to the theory of gravity, atomic theory, the theory of relativity, string theory, and music theory.

              Or taking away real sex education and going back to the "hairy hands" approach.  Or telling the kids that they'll die from marijuana (and thereby demonizing pot to the extent that they can't tell it apart from crystal meth, which makes crystal meth seem no worse than pot).

              Seems to me I've been seeing this stuff, lately, teachers union notwithstanding.

              Impeach.

              by ProgChr on Tue May 24, 2005 at 08:05:00 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  Not true (none / 1)

              Teachers are being pressured to teach Creationism. This pressure is real. And it affects the writing as well as the teaching of textbooks.

              by WCoastDH on Tue May 24, 2005 at 08:17:29 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

      •  "We share the disappointment, (4.00 / 2)

        outrage and sense of abandonment felt by millions..."

        And it feels glorious.

        We can blame those who have stood by us for our  endlessly growing righteous anger. We can promote hatred and push the country into unconscionable acts of inhumanity yet still be the Victims, because They won't submit to the frustrated spiritual purity in our hearts. God knows what we would do if we actually won.

        -7.38, -9.23

        by macdust on Mon May 23, 2005 at 09:03:54 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  DAMN those rules being available to both sides (none / 1)

      I'd cry for Frist but I don't have a face condom on me.

      "We are grateful to Majority Leader Frist for courageously fighting to defend the vital principle of basic fairness. That principle has now gone down to defeat. We share the disappointment, outrage and sense of abandonment felt by millions of conservative Americans who helped put Republicans in power last November. I am certain that these voters will remember both Democrats and Republicans who betrayed their trust."

      Bonus: Any Repug running in '06 wears the whackjob stench.

      by Peanut on Mon May 23, 2005 at 07:33:02 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Makes me wonder (4.00 / 2)

      Is there a Manchester United of Senate Republicans? A West Bromwich Albion of House Democrats? An Aston Villa of House Republicans?

      The mind spins, but at least he's right, Arsenal are the good guys.

      /soccer geek

      by djangone on Mon May 23, 2005 at 07:53:02 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I hate it when someone beats me to the punch line (none / 0)


        But I gave you a 4 anyway.

        Now, where does PSV Eindhoven belong in this universe?

        (-7.00, -5.18)
        Hopelessly pedantic since 1963.

        by admiralh on Tue May 24, 2005 at 01:09:22 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  They're too Cocu to include (none / 0)

          Aaaaaaaaaaack!

          Sorry sorry sorry sorry sorry

          Well at least PSV's probably getting Rommedahl back, although nothing can make up for Von Bommel's departure, that Homeric hero straight from central casting. In another age I could see him hefting a spear and charging straight at Diomedes crying 'On Danaans!'

          by djangone on Thu May 26, 2005 at 01:34:30 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  If the House Dems are like West Brom... (none / 0)

        no wonder we can't get anything done.  Personally, I'm scared as hell to see what ---son (I refuse to let him share the first three letters of my last name) will do, and the other scary types he's going to drag out for these races next year.  Brainwashed folks are simply scary to deal with.  Believe me, I'm surrounded by enough of them.

        From now on James Dobson shall be referred to ---son. I'm not sharing three letters of my last name with that s.o.b.

        by Dobber on Tue May 24, 2005 at 03:15:08 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  West Brom! (none / 0)

          Hey, West Brom survived in the Premiership this year, through a last day miraculous turn of events!  Similar to last night's last-minute Senate win!  Wow, I can't believe we're mentioning English football here at Dailykos!

          "Don't look back... something might be gaining on you..." -Satchel Paige.

          by npb7768 on Tue May 24, 2005 at 07:35:00 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  And that Arsenal (4.00 / 2)

      of Liberals..LOL..put a can of whoop ass on Dobson or at least showed we are not going to roll over while Dobson spanks our butts..that is for sure.
      He will have to save his Discipline for his own Flock and flog Republicans..LOL>

      Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter. Martin Luther King Jr.

      by wishingwell on Mon May 23, 2005 at 08:08:19 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Poor Dobson (none / 1)

    I am trying to come up with something to add to this but cannot.

    So, poor Dobson.

    The Republicans have a fundamental problem with telling the truth - Howard Dean.

    by NYC Sophia on Mon May 23, 2005 at 07:15:26 PM PDT

  •  Thomas, Scalia and Rehnquist (4.00 / 6)

    Does Dobson really believe that the filibuster didn't exist when these knuckleheads were appointed?

    On the other hand, a Supreme Court without Scalia?  schweet

    Insight into change teaches us hope. No matter how bad the situation, anything is possible. - Buddha

    by zenbowl on Mon May 23, 2005 at 07:15:36 PM PDT

    •  That's what I was thinking (4.00 / 2)

      Where did that comment come from?

      They really do just make up lies sometimes.

      -6.88, -6.72. The truth will set you free. But first it will piss you off.

      by Lucky Ducky on Mon May 23, 2005 at 07:21:09 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Non-reality-based communities (4.00 / 4)

        In an alternate universe, maybe the Democrats controlled the Senate when Nixon nominated Rehnquist?  Oh, wait, we did.....  

        We will keep marching toward that one America, and we're not going to stop until we get there.

        by tlee61 on Mon May 23, 2005 at 07:29:39 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Me Too (4.00 / 3)

        William Rehnquist was confirmed 68-28 in 1972. As I recall Rehnquist was known as a forceful conservative. As I further recall during bruising confirmation hearings, Rehnquist's critics attacked him as supporting segregation and opposing civil rights. Deftly defending himself, Rehnquist impressed senators with his legal acumen, and was confirmed 68-28 by the full Senate. He was confirmed again under Regan when he was elevated to the job of Chief Justice.

        Scalia also won confirmation, but that was before his true colors where known.

        Thomas won confirmation after one of the most brutal confirmation fights of all time.

        It's called politics boys and girls. Something the Republicans have forgotten. If you work with the other side, they will work with you.

        by ronbyers on Mon May 23, 2005 at 07:45:06 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Rehnquist confirmation (4.00 / 2)

          And the huge debate was over the fact that his summer house in Vermont had a century old provision in the deed to the effect that only white people could own it.  He made the point effectively that very few people read every page in a deed that went all the way back to the land grants by George III.

          Of course in investment banking circles he is best known for signing the documents during the Nixon administration saying that Ginnie Mae could issue certificatates carrying the full faith and credit of the United States.

          by mpearl on Mon May 23, 2005 at 08:19:31 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  And in 1972 (none / 1)

          the Democrats controlled the Senate.

          I have my fears, but they do not have me - Peter Gabriel

          by badger on Mon May 23, 2005 at 08:19:48 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  Well.... (none / 0)

          ...at least Dobson's statement puts Scalia, Thomas and Rehnquist on a par with Owen, Brown and Myers.  All are activist judges far removed from the mainstream of legal thought.  Though I don't think Mullah Dobson meant it that way.

          by Madchen on Tue May 24, 2005 at 04:10:29 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  Dobson has read the constitution (4.00 / 7)

      about as well as he has read the bible. He just doesn't get it, and he never will. He depends on "divine guidance" to tell him what it all means. He doesn't need to read the words and look up the ones he doesn't understand. That voice in his head lets him know all he needs to know.

      One of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics is that you end up being governed by your inferiors. Plato

      by KGlenn on Mon May 23, 2005 at 07:30:04 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  That struck me as well (none / 1)

      I see a new argument emerging from that sentence: The fillibuster only exists because of this compromise. Therefore parties to this compromise have the right to withdraw from it (like a Cold War era treaty) and end the fillibuster.

      I wouldn't be shocked to see that kind of spin by Sunday.

      Act as if ye have faith and faith ye shall be given. In other words, fake it 'til you make it.

      by Cbal on Mon May 23, 2005 at 07:35:54 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  sure does (none / 0)

        sure does seem to be the direction they're heading with this. with the added bonus that if they get the votes for it again, tehy can pull off an elimination of the filibuster. and since democrats were widely against it, they never will be able to pull a nuclear supreme court out of their asses.

        which puts us in a strategically inferior, and probably ethically superior spot. feels familiar.

        by GetSamuel on Mon May 23, 2005 at 10:01:54 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  not only did the filibuster exist... (none / 0)

      ...but Democrats controlled the Senate and voted to confirm Scalia.

      "See a world of tanks, ruled by a world of banks." —Sol Invictus

      by Delirium on Mon May 23, 2005 at 09:30:27 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Dobson's Remarks (none / 0)


      Test for insanity: is Dobson embarrassed by how stupid his remarks are. (Metric: Yes, sane. No, nuts.)

      by JDavis on Tue May 24, 2005 at 05:55:08 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  I hope his head melts (4.00 / 5)

    hateful slimebucket.

    Bye Bye Blackwell!

    by BlueGoo on Mon May 23, 2005 at 07:15:59 PM PDT

  •  Dobson (none / 1)

    What a drama queen.

    by demnow on Mon May 23, 2005 at 07:16:20 PM PDT

  •  Awww - poor Dobson - NOT (4.00 / 2)

    It is nice to see him lead the division of the republican base - yippee!

    Anyone who has the power to make you believe absurdities has the power to make you commit injustices. Voltaire 1694-1778

    by SallyCat on Mon May 23, 2005 at 07:16:51 PM PDT

  •  So maybe we did win... (4.00 / 4)

    let's throw more water on them and see if they all melt!

    by sandblaster on Mon May 23, 2005 at 07:17:07 PM PDT

  •  What'll Frist do now? (none / 1)

    He's already spending too much time with his Family.

    Mother Nature bats last.

    by pigpaste on Mon May 23, 2005 at 07:17:14 PM PDT

    •  Put your money on the table! (none / 0)

      Anyone want to take bets as to what issue the American Taliban will whip itself up into a froth about next?  What will be the subject of the Rovian talking points memo released to the Republicans?  What trite little catchphrase (such as "an up or down vote") will be repeated endlessly until it loses all real meaning?

      by Madchen on Tue May 24, 2005 at 04:15:21 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Anything that makes Dobson cry (4.00 / 3)

    is a win.

    Mad Wombat

    by FleetAdmiralJ on Mon May 23, 2005 at 07:17:18 PM PDT

  •  Channeling Glen Beck (none / 0)

    I could kill him!!!

    With a big ol' lie And a flag and a pie And a mom and a bible Most folks are just liable To buy any line Any place, any time ~ FZ

    by f furney on Mon May 23, 2005 at 07:17:18 PM PDT

  •  this is the proof we won (4.00 / 18)

    1.  Dobson's statement above.

    2.  Faux news is not covering it and has moved on to other topics.

    3.  Right wing websites are much more upset than we are here.

    4.  Moderate republicans flexed their muscles for the first time since Bush was elected.

    5.  Frist was smacked down by HIS OWN PARTY, not just by us.  A double embarrassment.

    6.  McCain is now the de facto head of the Republican party.

    Maybe the Blue Team is not the winner tonight but the fright wing is definitely the big loser.

    Politics is like driving. To go backward, put it in R. To go forward, put it in D.
    Give to Populista's Obamathon 2.0!

    by TrueBlueMajority on Mon May 23, 2005 at 07:17:36 PM PDT

    •  Okay, you convinced me (none / 0)

      I was angry at first, then I was resigned, but I think you are right - I think this turns out much better for us, than for the right wing extremists.  

      I just feel badly for those who will show up looking for justice from Owen and Rogers Brown.

      My new bumper sticker: Cheney-Satan '08

      by adigal on Mon May 23, 2005 at 07:32:12 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  The game is afoot (none / 0)

      Tonight, we witnessed the opening news conference of the 2008 GOP primary campaign.   Get used to this idea:  McCain-Graham.

      We will keep marching toward that one America, and we're not going to stop until we get there.

      by tlee61 on Mon May 23, 2005 at 07:33:09 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I don't like McCain-Graham in 2008 (none / 1)

        I would much rather see Bill Frist get the nod by the GOP because I think he would be much easier to beat than McCain IMHO.

        by bhouston79 on Mon May 23, 2005 at 07:44:27 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Maybe but..... (none / 1)

          The religious right would not be motivated to show up in droves for McCain. MOst find him too liberal for their tastes and far too secular. For this reason, a moderate running for President might be better to beat than a right wing wacko that gets votes through rallying around their perversion of Christianity and shouting 9-11 from the rooftops.

          Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter. Martin Luther King Jr.

          by wishingwell on Mon May 23, 2005 at 08:31:12 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  Good call (none / 0)

        This compromise has been in its present form for weeks now.  We knew who was getting a vote and who wasn't.  I wouldn't be at all surprised if most of the recent debate has been over who was going to announce and how.  McCain has said over and over that he wants to run, and he has just become the guy that Rove needs to check with before POTUS announces new agenda items.  Look for the black mistress stories to start any day now.

        A good plan today is better than a perfect plan tomorrow.

        by Webster on Tue May 24, 2005 at 08:32:38 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  One more that you left out... (4.00 / 7)

      this is the first Congressional action since W. was elected that was not completely orchestrated by Karl Rove.  Republicans, in numbers large enough to sway the majority vote, have defied the Administration.

      If they do it now on judges, they will damn sure do it on Social Security.

      by Swoosh on Mon May 23, 2005 at 07:50:09 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Politics is Not a Zero Sum Game (none / 0)

      You make very good arguments that this is bad for the far right, and good for "moderate" (actually just a little less far right) Republicans.

      That doesn't necessarily make it good for the Democrats.

      And, indeed, what's good for the Democrats is not necessarily good for progressives (i.e. a subset of Democrats + those of us on the left who have given up on the donkey).

      This nicely summarizes what's wrong with American political life today. (Source)

      by GreenSooner on Mon May 23, 2005 at 11:22:14 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Okay, now I see.. (none / 0)

    we won...

    by andrewboho on Mon May 23, 2005 at 07:17:43 PM PDT

  •  who who who now (none / 0)

    who who who. We can't let McCain get too much hay our of this!

    by oysterface on Mon May 23, 2005 at 07:17:46 PM PDT

    •  hell (4.00 / 3)

      if McCain becomes president it will be a huge improvement lol.

      Mad Wombat

      by FleetAdmiralJ on Mon May 23, 2005 at 07:18:44 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Running as a 3rd party unity ticket (none / 0)

        with Lieberman as VP.

        Probably net result helping the Dems

        by seanflynn on Mon May 23, 2005 at 07:20:30 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Be careful what you wish for (none / 1)

          McCain is unpredictable enough that he very well might bolt the GOP if they veer too far to the right in 2008, and the results of a three-way race could be totally unpredictable. He's got very high approval ratings amongst independents and moderates in both parties, and I'm not sure that such a scenario would necessarily favor the Democrats.

          McCain at the top of any party's ticket will win Arizona hands-down and will probably do well in other Western states. That hurts the GOP on their own turf. But I worry that a third-party McCain would hurt Democrats in marginally-blue states like Minnesota and Wisconsin, where a strong independent tradition exists.

          by pine on Mon May 23, 2005 at 07:31:59 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Not saying I wish for it (none / 1)

            And I agree it would not guarantee a Democratic victory. But having one moderate conservative Republican (and only moderate by the current GOP standards) and one extreme conservative Republican versus a moderate liberal Dem (Clinton, Clark?) still looks good for Dems.

            In a close race, though, it could mean no electoral majority.

            by seanflynn on Mon May 23, 2005 at 09:01:50 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

      •  Hell, Gomer Pyle would be an improvement. n/t (none / 0)

        "But their gift is an empty snake, Carrying hypocrisy in its mouth like venom" - Sami Al Hajj

        by walkshills on Mon May 23, 2005 at 08:59:55 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  what a moran!!! (none / 0)

    Justice Clarence Thomas, Justice Antonin Scalia, and Chief Justice William Rehnquist would never have served on the U. S. Supreme Court if this agreement had been in place during their confirmations.

    It explains an awful lot about his lack of understanding about how our government works...

    Even I have a Blog! Voice of Mordor

    by Nazgul35 on Mon May 23, 2005 at 07:17:53 PM PDT

  •  Sweeet!!! (none / 0)

    Great to have them tearing each other up like this! They're probably not stupid enough to do it, but if only the fundies would start a third-party movement.. at least I can dream...

    by GregP on Mon May 23, 2005 at 07:17:56 PM PDT

  •  Ooooooh, a shadowy cabal of Moderates (4.00 / 10)

    plotting to spread their perfidious Moderation far and wide! They must be stopped before their Moderation plants the seeds of further Moderation, and that begets further Moderation still, and America is led down the path to a sensible, Moderate ruin!

    by movie buff on Mon May 23, 2005 at 07:17:58 PM PDT

    •  Yes, we won... (4.00 / 2)

      "Too long have you been buffeted by angry people who think that God talks to them. You have a right to your moderation! You have the power to be calm! We will use the IED of truth to explode the SUV of dogmatic expression!" -- Jon Carroll

      Brother Jimmy is taken down by Brother Flaming Sword of Moderation.

      "There is nothing false about hope." -- Barack Obama

      by DC Pol Sci on Mon May 23, 2005 at 07:20:41 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  "A Shadowy Cabal of Moderates" (none / 0)

      ... would be a great name for a band. Well, for an album, maybe.  

      Well, this made me smile.  I'll be curious to see where Dobson and Dobsonny Boy (Frist) go next on this.  

      BareNaked Pundits!

      by Hlinko on Mon May 23, 2005 at 07:31:08 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  'Unconstitutional Filibuster' can open for you (none / 1)

        When our band becomes famous, it'll simply be UF.

        Dobson's such a idiot. WTF does he think unconstitutional means anyway -- it's bad when people he doesn't like have constitutional coverage too? Oh wait, that's exactly his thing.

        by Peanut on Mon May 23, 2005 at 07:52:59 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  UF - I like it (none / 0)

          Yeah, that is sooo true.  "I didn't get my way" becomes "this is unconstitutional" in the wacky world of Dobson.  

          FYI, one of my buddies was at that Delay protest here in DC a few weeks back (i.e., outside that gala dinner being thrown for him), and apparently Dobson was kinda nasty to him.  Scowling, and snarling, "Democrats do it too" or something like that.  

          I mean, I suppose I can understand being a little ticked off when a gaggle of people are protesting the guy you're partying with, but... he still was surprisingly nasty.  

          BareNaked Pundits!

          by Hlinko on Tue May 24, 2005 at 05:10:08 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  Reading this.... (4.00 / 3)

    ...was as satisfying as any orgasm I have ever had.

    And that's all I have to say about that.

    "A person is as free as they believe themselves to be off." - Fortune cookie

    by The Termite on Mon May 23, 2005 at 07:18:04 PM PDT

  •  all I can say to this is (none / 1)

    na na na na na to dobson and his crowd...I always thought it was cristian to turn the other cheek!!!!!!!!  ;o)

    by brenda stewart on Mon May 23, 2005 at 07:18:15 PM PDT

    •  cristian (4.00 / 2)

      is awesome.

      Not capitalized, spelled wrong. We can use this to apply to the fundamentalist and their hypocritical, opportunistic, selective dogma.

      as in "cristian coalition."

      And we can reserve use of Christian for, you know, Christians, as in people who live by the words of Jesus without interpretation by lying hypocritical wealthy Satanist assholes.

      America: It's a good IDEA for a country ...

      by Tony Seybert on Mon May 23, 2005 at 08:08:12 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Yay! (none / 0)

    And let the feasting begin! Oooh, and he's sticking with Frist after this failure... When someone's presidential aspirations go up in flames, these guys just keep on pushing!

    by Rob M on Mon May 23, 2005 at 07:18:32 PM PDT

  •  WE did just win folks, (4.00 / 2)

    Dobson knows that if the Repugs try to use the "Nuclear Option" if Bush sends up a radical SCOTUS, the country will be paying alot more attention. This was thier chance to sneak through a real winger right under the public nose. He knows that mainstream Americans are not on his side.

    by PLS on Mon May 23, 2005 at 07:18:53 PM PDT

  •  brown or owens for sc?? (none / 0)

    let me ask you this. if the dems approve these 3 judges now, how can they then claim extraordinary circumsatnces and use a filibuster on them if one of them is nominated by Bush to the SC when Rehnquist retires?

    by elizup on Mon May 23, 2005 at 07:20:06 PM PDT

    •  asdf (none / 1)

      because scotus appointments require more scrutiny than appeals court appointments because of the nature of the job.

      plus were we to get into the "is this judge too radical" debate in the MSM, then at leaast we are focusing on issues of relevance.

      by JoelK in AZ on Mon May 23, 2005 at 07:25:39 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  That's easy (none / 0)

      The Dems can easily say that any of the people involved in the current fight are way too unprepared for the Supreme Court -- indeed they only squeaked by for the appellate court positions.  I think the current slate of near-judges will end their carreers where (if) they now land.

      How about a "Justice Gonzalez," will the Dems stop him?

      Save your tears for the living

      by immanentize on Mon May 23, 2005 at 07:26:11 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  It would be extrordinary for the president... (none / 0)

      ...to nominate one of these activist jurists to the SCOTUS.

      The "compromise" means that he should nominate a moderate.  Hopefully someone like Stevens (Ford nominee).  But even someone like Kennedy (Reagan nominee) would be a huge improvement.

      I'm thinking the president will wisely forget about nominating someone like Owen to the SCOTUS and just focus on winning the race to nominate the first Latino to that court.

      -6.88, -6.72. The truth will set you free. But first it will piss you off.

      by Lucky Ducky on Mon May 23, 2005 at 07:26:50 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Good point re SCOTUS (none / 0)

        Given the geriatric makeup of the current Court, Dubya will probably get the chance to nominate a new CJ, and at least one (maybe two) Associates before the end his term: Of course, with Bush one never knows, but it is probably unlikely that he is going to want to start a major donnybrook in the Senate by nominating a real wingnut (and that, IMO, includes the idea of elevating Scalia to CJ) - not after this "nuclear option" fiasco (which, IMNSHO can be, and should be, majorly spun as a big Dem win) has brought the Repub's judiciary stinkers out for all too see. My guess is Bush's first SCOTUS nominee will be an uncontroversial (true) conservative dulllard - the sort who will get praised all to hell and confrmed 100-0. The next one though.......??

        by Jay C on Mon May 23, 2005 at 07:44:40 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  SCOTUS nominees (none / 0)

          I think he will move to elevate Scalia the first chance he gets.

          I also think he will nominate a Latino jurist to the SCOTUS.

          Remember, the President doesn't need fundamentalists and evangelicals any more.  His approval ratings are in the toilet.  Does he care?  No way.  He doesn't need them.  He owes his entire public life to them, but if he wants, he can cast them aside like yesterday's trash and start thinking about his legacy.  Hopefully that legacy will include responsible SCOTUS appointments.

          -6.88, -6.72. The truth will set you free. But first it will piss you off.

          by Lucky Ducky on Mon May 23, 2005 at 07:49:16 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  I have trouble (none / 1)

            envisioning this scenario.  Bush's approval ratings are in the toilet, but he is only a mouthpiece, anyway; it's his puppetmasters -- Rove, Cheney, the neocons -- that have a continuing vested interest in things like the SCOTUS appointments.

            The NY Times Magazine did a thing about a month ago, front paged here by Hunter, I think (I'm too lazy to search for link), that looked at a group of radical libertarian conservatives who see the next appointments to the SCOTUS as an opportunity to roll back the New Deal, all environmental legislation, and pretty much any progressive social infrastructure enacted since 1820 or so.  The interpretation of jurisdiction over interstate trade, which accounts for the substance behind a great many environmental laws, would be drastically curtailed.   The takings clause, which ensures that the government compensate for any removal of property, would be extended in such a way as to interpret all undermining of corporate profit as "takings."

            It's probably not the religious wingnuts we need to worry about.  It's those who would utterly gut any vestige of America as supporting a contemporary welfare state.

            Nothing requires a greater effort of thought than arguments to justify the rule of nonthought. -- Milan Kundera

            by Dale on Mon May 23, 2005 at 08:25:10 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Bush is not a libertarian (none / 0)

              Re: The NY Times Magazine did a thing about a month ago, front paged here by Hunter, I think (I'm too lazy to search for link), that looked at a group of radical libertarian conservatives who see the next appointments to the SCOTUS as an opportunity to roll back the New Deal, all environmental legislation, and pretty much any progressive social infrastructure enacted since 1820 or so.

              The Bush administration has shown no inclination whatsoever to please libertarian conservatives (Big Government Conservatism anyone?) and there aren't enough of those people in the electorate to make them want to kowtow to them anyway. It the social conservatives they see as their adorable base and it's that group they will seek to plerase with SCOTUS appointemnts. Indeed, a liberatrian appointrement to the Court would actually displease the Religious Right, who regard libertarians as only slightly less wicked than liberals.

              by Aleks311 on Tue May 24, 2005 at 06:00:41 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

          •  december 2000, anyone? (4.00 / 2)

            start thinking about his legacy.  Hopefully that legacy will include responsible SCOTUS appointments.

            this comment reminds me of december 2000 - remember when everyone was saying that shlubya would govern very moderately due to the divisiveness of their boys fixing the election that gore won?  well we saw how that turned out.  now he has rove sitting in the west wing thinking about his "legacy" and it turns out the legacy they want is purest wingnuttery.  let's destroy social security and the entire new deal!  let's bankrupt the whole nation so we can drown it in the bathtub like grover says!  and that includes packing the courts with the most rabidly reactionary judges they can find, qualified or not.  get them in there for life where they will screw up any conception of the rule of law for decades to come.  now that's a legacy.

            moreover, i challenge you to find one example of george the 43rd doing something responsible.  in his entire lifetime.  leopard can't change his spots, you know?

            l'audace! l'audace! toujours l'audace!

            by zeke L on Mon May 23, 2005 at 08:40:52 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

      •  I don't expect this President (none / 0)

        to do anything "wisely" or "reasonably" or "carefully" or "rational" or "moderate" or "compromising."

        Does he even know what has happened to his ratings?  Remember, the man exists in a total bubble of unreality.  His gang boasted they could make their own reality and force the whole world to buy into it.  Eventually they won't be able to pedal fast enough, and they're going to run out of duct tape. If they weren't certain to do vast quantities of irreparable damage first to millions of undeserving people, I would be looking forward to watching it happen.

        -8.38, -7.49

        by papercut on Tue May 24, 2005 at 09:04:20 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Because, (none / 0)

      it is only logical to hold appointments to the SC to a higher standard. They are much more influential than appelate judges. Any of these people could be filibustered if they got the SC nod. More Americans will be paying attention then, and the more extreme someone is the more people will support the Dems blocking it. The public is starting to freak out already about extremists, this would tip them over the edge.

      by PLS on Mon May 23, 2005 at 07:31:18 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Well, I'm with you in being unsure about hoe much (none / 0)

      of a win this is.  But these three will not hav ebben on the high courts long enough to get nominated by Bush, IMO.

      by Anaxamander on Mon May 23, 2005 at 07:32:40 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Frist wins (none / 0)

    Dobson is sticking with their guy.  Yes, Frist didn't win -- but he was willing to go to bat for them and it was McCain and others that "betrayed" the right.

    Dobson won't throw Frist overboard, he knows that with Frist in the White House he gets four more years of this shit.

    If Kos thinks Frist lost than I really have to wonder how naive he really is.  The Dems who are proclaiming victory look like grade schoolers. Politics are about the long term -- and right now the right knows it has three more District Courts on their side that were not there yesterday.  Dems got nothing.

    And what about Bolton?  You think the Dems will risk looking like they are throwing out the compromise by filibustering Bolton? No way.

    by numediaman on Mon May 23, 2005 at 07:20:29 PM PDT

    •  He cant dump frist.....yet (none / 0)

      if for no other reason that he needs someone to be his puppet in the senate through 2006. that doesn't mean that first isn't toast for 2008 though.

      Mad Wombat

      by FleetAdmiralJ on Mon May 23, 2005 at 07:21:45 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  WE WIN (none / 0)

      What can the Republicans do now when they speak to their flock?  

      The idea behind sayings that they expend on their flock like: "Want to get rid of abortion?  Get rid of liberal judges?  Save Terri Schiavo?"  

      "Then Vote Republican!". . .

      just doesn't work so well when it's accompanied by a little voiceover at the end like in the car commercials with the guy saying "offer not valid in RI, SC, VA, OH, PA, ME or AZ."

      They really de-energized their flock and made their enemy the GOP moderates.

      Pass the Employee Free Choice Act!

      by PaulVA on Mon May 23, 2005 at 07:55:32 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Dobson sticking w/Frist means WE win (none / 1)

        Seriously, the fringies control the Republican presidential primary. Please, please, please let them still love Frist in '08. I do believe that smacked-down, mumbling, sweaty and pasty-faced, cat-killing, vegetative-state-perpetuating, video-diagnosing, miserable Senate voting record holder who may well believe that tears cause AIDS and who can't hold a party coalition together...may be a little easier to beat in a general election than newly-minted moderate Graham or stalwart "maverick" McCain. So I say, stand by your man, Dobby!

        Liberal parenting funnies at The Hausfrau Blog

        by jamfan on Mon May 23, 2005 at 08:13:32 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Keep him in there (none / 0)

      Better Frist and Allen battle it out for the wingnut support.  By the time that fight is over there will be now way to gloss over their true colors.  Bush was able to do so, as he had no real fight to his hard right.  It's McCain and or Grahm  you need to worry about more. The more Dobson and Co. over reach, the better.

      by houndog on Mon May 23, 2005 at 08:12:18 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  I think senators are (none / 0)

      going to be looking at positioning themselves with the next administration though.  If John McCain (who said he supports Bolton but Bolton's nomination would "die the death of a thousand cuts") gets his group of 7 to kill the Bolton nomination, he would become the  de facto leader of the Republican Party.  Then he could essentially set an agenda right down the center.  Too bad the center has gotten to be so far right.

      A good plan today is better than a perfect plan tomorrow.

      by Webster on Tue May 24, 2005 at 09:01:03 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  I'm Disappointed (4.00 / 4)

    I was hoping to see video of his head morphing into 8 green snakes, which would emerge from the the neck-hole of his shirt with their big white fangs.  And stuff.

    by ColoDemo on Mon May 23, 2005 at 07:20:35 PM PDT

  •  I just thought of that celebrity jeopardy episode (none / 0)

    where Trebek is like "oh great. Mr. Connery wants to say something."

    Mad Wombat

    by FleetAdmiralJ on Mon May 23, 2005 at 07:20:38 PM PDT

  •  poor scalia (4.00 / 3)

    with a 98 vote confirmation, there's absolutely no way he could have ever served on a federal court.

    i wonder what he's up to now, since the democrats never let him be confirmed.

    I got nuthin (-6.88, -6.15)

    by guyermo on Mon May 23, 2005 at 07:20:41 PM PDT

  •  "nothing of significance has changed" (none / 0)

    Exactly, and that's why this is, at worst, a tie.  (And now that we have the extremists ready to attack the moderates, it's really a win!)

    When you understand why you dismiss all the other gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours.

    by RequestedUsername on Mon May 23, 2005 at 07:21:17 PM PDT

  •  Here's what's important (4.00 / 4)

    1.  The self-annointed King-maker of the Republicans is proclaiming that a compromise engineered by those who do not cater to him is BAD; he thus further alienates those very moderate Republicans;

    2.  The growing image of a Republican right-wing, all the way up to the President, beholden to this demagogue and his ilk, will be reinforced in the minds of all moderates who may be already uncomfortable with the direction of the Party.

    3.  Democrats, as a group, are being cast as compromisers, along with a subset of moderate Republicans, helping to spread their image as more reasonable and fair.

    4.  All of this creates a hope that, among some slice of the electorate that could be classified as "swing" voters, a shift in loyalties is being reinforced.  For those who complain that, on the ground, the result is merely that some repulsive judges get to win approval, this was NEVER about that.  It's not even really about the next Supreme Court appointment, IMO.  It's about the next election, and the one after that, and winning back enough of the rational middle to put Dobson and his minions back into permanent irrelevance where they belong.

    Yet it is not our part to master all the tides of the world, but to do what is in us for the succour of those years wherein we are set... -- Gandalf

    by dnta on Mon May 23, 2005