Follow BeltwayBlips on TwitterBlog Reactions
RedState: The Nuclear Hypocrisy of Dana Milbank
Political Animal: Consistency isn't their strong point
Hit & Run: HackWatch: A Good Chunk of the GOP Senate Edition
Reactions
 |
Republican hypocrisy http://tinyurl.com/y863yfa No surprise there! #p2 #noisemachine #tcot 11/20/2009 |
 |
Republican hypocrisy, isn't it obvious? http://tinyurl.com/y863yfa 11/20/2009 |
 |
GOP flip-flop http://bit.ly/zd7uh 11/18/2009 |
The Nuclear Hypocrisy of Dana Milbank
RedState —
... Today, Dana Milbank has an article up on the Washington Post’s Washington Sketch blog where he basically skewers a number of Senate Republicans for employing the filibuster against President Obama’s judicial picks. ...
Consistency isn't their strong point
Political Animal —
... back in March. That didn't happen. The very same Republican senators who insisted that judicial filibusters are an affront to our constitutional traditions yesterday launched a filibuster of the Hamilton nomination. Dana Milbank's piece on this is worth reading. In their quest to thwart President Obama, Republicans do not fear the hobgoblin of consistency. For much of this decade, Sen. Jeff Sessions of Alabama, now the top Republican on the Judiciary Committee, led the fight against Democratic filibusters of George W. Bush's judicial nominees. He decried Democrats' ...
HackWatch: A Good Chunk of the GOP Senate Edition
Hit & Run —
...
Dana Milbank plays gotcha with GOP senators on the
filibuster. Surprise! Their feelings on the parliamentary
maneuver are largely dependent on who's in power. He starts with
Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.), who's leading the filibuster against
U.S. District Judge David Hamilton, Obama's first appellate court
nominee. ...
How not to lure us back to the “new” GOP
The Moderate Voice —
... away from Obama / PelosiCare and considered President Barack Obama’s nomination of U.S. District Judge David Hamilton to an appellate court position, and the results were instructive. During the tenure of George W. Bush, much was made of the judicial nomination and confirmation process, with debates raging over the upper chamber’s proper role in “advise and consent” and whether filibustering nominees was an appropriate use minority leverage. Dana Milbank takes a look at what a difference a few years can make in the words and deeds of some of our very ...
Filibuster hypocrisy
Ezra Klein —
... If the sign of a great mind is the ability to hold two opposing ideas at the same time, the sign of a great partisan is the ability to hold two opposing ideas depending on whether your party is in power. And the Senate, as Dana Milbank notices, has some great partisan, particularly when it comes to filibustering judicial nominees. ...
HackWatch: A Good Chunk of the GOP Senate Edition
The Agitator —
... Dana Milbank plays gotcha with GOP senators on the filibuster. Surprise! Their feelings on the parliamentary maneuver are largely dependent on who’s in power. He starts with Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.), whose leading the filibuster against U.S. District Judge David Hamilton, Obama’s first appellate court nominee. ...
Parallel Politics, Right Wing Roundup
Notes From a Grumpy Old Man —
... Maureen Dowd David Harsanyi Dana Milbank Michael Crowley "In their quest to thwart President Obama, Republicans do not fear the hobgoblin of consistency." - Dana Milbank "You're either A) a scum-sucking, terror-loving elitist or B) a radical, tea bag-loving simpleton." - David Harsanyi "A combination of Jesus, Mohammed, and Moses couldn't get that straightened out." - blackton parallel ...
Troubles Everywhere
The American Spectator —
Streetcar Line Troubles Everywhere By Quin Hillyer on 11.19.09 @ 6:07AM From the Department of Disjointed Thoughts and Topics: Filibustered judicial nominees. Dana Snarky Milbank of the Washington Post is all in a lather about supposed Republican hypocrisy about filibustering judicial nominees. Of course, he has spent years utterly ignoring all nuances or thoughtful explanations by Republicans about their stances on filibusters. And when he blasts far more hypocritical Democratic stances on filibusters, hell will freeze over. An entire column could be written nailing Milbank's own double standards on the matter. But Mr. Snark isn't worth the time. ...
A hack argument
Power Line —
There's a stock column appearing in left-liberal MSM outlets all over the country, The author varies, but the main point is the same: Republican Senators are guilty of "hypocrisy" for attempting to filibuster one of President Obama's judicial nominees after having criticized Democrats for filibustering a host of President Bush's nominees a few years ago. This piece by Dana Milbank in the Washington Post is an example of the genre.
But why is it hypocritical for Republicans to resist a regime under which judges nominated by a Republican president need 60 votes for confirmation -- as so many did for years and some did until the bitter end -- while judges nominated by a ...
On Filibustering Judicial Nominees-Part 2 -- By: Ed Whelan
Bench Memos on National Review Online —
Not surprisingly, lots of commentators have lazily condemned as hypocritical the effort by various Republican senators to filibuster the Seventh Circuit nomination of David Hamilton. (The Washington Post’s editorial “Giving hypocrisy a bad name” and Dana Milbank’s column are typical examples.) Although I disagree with the filibuster effort (for the reasons explained in my Part 1), I think that the hypocrisy charge is meritless.
Republican senators who opposed the Democratic filibuster of President Bush’s nominees and who supported the Hamilton filibuster can usefully be divided ...
