Senate Majority Leader Frist has agreed to participate in the April 24 simulcast, which has the Democrats blustering.
The program is an effort to “connect the dots” for Christian conservatives who have not configured the use of the filibuster to block judicial nominees as a battleground for faith.
(I for one had not been in favor of changing Senate rules on the filibuster, but announced in a post that I had changed my mind because of the demonstration of judicial arrogance during the Terri Schiavo case.)
The telecast is being sponsored by Family Research Council. FRC President Tony Perkins says in a website message:
"As the liberal, anti-Christian dogma of the left has been repudiated in almost every recent election, the courts have become the last great bastion for liberalism. For years activist courts, aided by liberal interest groups like the A.C.L.U., have been quietly working under the veil of the judiciary, like thieves in the night, to rob us of our Christian heritage and our religious freedoms."
Senate Democrats aren’t opposed to all Christians. Just conservative Christians. On the other hand they’re not opposed to just Christian conservatives, but to conservatism in all of its forms.
While Frist’s decision to use the faith card is by no means the threat to the republic that Chuck Schumer and others claim, it is nonetheless a risky calculation. It may help focus the attention of Christian conservatives on the filibuster issue, but if the concentrated power of the Christian lobby is defeated here, it may embolden those who seek to discredit the newly realized power of the movement.
But it is worth the risk because of the damage being caused by activist and liberal judges.
Blog Action
Jeffrey King at Three Bad Fingers is trying to rally the blogosphere, given Senator McCain's jumping ship yesterday on the Constitutional Option and Senator Rick Santorum's indication that Republican momentum has been lost in resolving the filibuster impasse.
Jeffrey says:
“Many blogs are encouraging readers to email or call fence-sitting senators, to press for their positive vote in changing senate rules. While this is powerful in itself , I believe with proper coordination, the blogosphere is capable of much much more. Each call received or email sent currently ends up as a tally, presented to the contacted senator. I would like each email to be entered into the public domain, and centrally linked, creating public pressure never before seen.”
Go to ThreeBadFingers for more on Jeffrey’s call to arms.
--James Jewell
(I for one had not been in favor of changing Senate rules on the filibuster, but announced in a post that I had changed my mind because of the demonstration of judicial arrogance during the Terri Schiavo case.)
YanıtlaSilIt is worth noting, that one of the judges who ruled against Terri Schiavo's parents is one of the judge's that Bush is trying to push through the Senate. The judge was put up for nomination in Bush's first term and rejected by Democrats. During a Senate recess Bush did an emergency appointment to get the judge on the bench.
So, one of the judges that ruled on the Schiavo case is a judge that is conservative enough to warrant a Fillibuster showdown, but he still didn't rule in favor of Schiavo's parents.
You can argue judicial arrogance and activism, when it's one or two judges, but when multiple judges from different courts are all ruling the same way, you might want to reconsider who's being activist. When the supreme court rules 9-0, that's not activism, that's following the constitution.
(I for one had not been in favor of changing Senate rules on the filibuster, but announced in a post that I had changed my mind because of the demonstration of judicial arrogance during the Terri Schiavo case.)
YanıtlaSilIt is worth noting, that one of the judges who ruled against Terri Schiavo's parents is one of the judge's that Bush is trying to push through the Senate. The judge was put up for nomination in Bush's first term and rejected by Democrats. During a Senate recess Bush did an emergency appointment to get the judge on the bench.
So, one of the judges that ruled on the Schiavo case is a judge that is conservative enough to warrant a Fillibuster showdown, but he still didn't rule in favor of Schiavo's parents.
You can argue judicial arrogance and activism, when it's one or two judges, but when multiple judges from different courts are all ruling the same way, you might want to reconsider who's being activist. When the supreme court rules 9-0, that's not activism, that's following the constitution.
Let Frist be Frist.
YanıtlaSilFirst he gets up in front of the Senate and panders to Schiavo idiots and proclaims to have a diagnosis from a videotape. Now he is getting up in front of the world and marginalizing himself as misinformed Jesus freak bibletolah.
Every time he pulls one of these things he make the Republicans look like a bunch of power drunk fools out of touch with the center of America.
If we keep letting Frist be Frist not only will he be the minority leader he might be able to unseat Rush Limbaugh as the Michael Moore of the right.
Face facts, freaks. The Jesus thing is getting old and fast. Its hurting the Republicans and badly and I am smiling.
Hi Rooftop MediaWorks I’ve been looking for related blogs and I came across yours on Faith, Frist and Filibuster during my trawl, so I thought it would be polite to let you know about my visit. You are most welcome to come and visit me at . I would also be happy to trade links with you if you are interested. Bye for now and have a nice day! Brother Roy.
YanıtlaSil