Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

STFU Ben! Key Democrat warns against 'activist' Obama court nominee

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
jefferson_dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-24-09 08:21 PM
Original message
STFU Ben! Key Democrat warns against 'activist' Obama court nominee
What the fuck is an "activist" anyway?

Key Democrat warns against 'activist' Obama court nominee
by Michael Mathes Michael Mathes

WASHINGTON (AFP) – A leading Democratic senator warned Sunday his party could support a potentially polarizing obstruction of President Barack Obama's nominee to the Supreme Court if he names an "activist" to the bench.

Parties in opposition to a sitting president traditionally call for moderation in a pick to the country's highest court, but moderate Democrat Ben Nelson issued a blunt warning from Obama's own party that the president should not choose someone seen as out of the mainstream.

"I don't care whether they're liberal or conservative," Nelson told Fox News Sunday in an interview. "I just want to make sure they're not activist. I don't want an activist on the bench."

"I think that's the test -- will they be an activist or not?" Nelson said.

"And I would hope that there wouldn't be any circumstances that would be so extreme with any of the president's nominees that the other side would feel the need to filibuster or that I might feel the need to filibuster in a case of extraordinary circumstances."

<SNIP>

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20090525/pl_afp/uspoliticsjusticecourt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
MadMaddie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-24-09 08:23 PM
Response to Original message
1. Really! Any more polarizing than Roberts who only supports
and sides with corporations? Guess Ben didn't consider how divisive Roberts would be?

When is ole Ben up for reelection?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Captain Hilts Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-24-09 08:25 PM
Response to Original message
2. Yes, he needs to shut up. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
firedupdem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-24-09 08:35 PM
Response to Original message
3. I hate that guy! How in the hell do people like that get elected
on a Democratic ticket?

Forget it...I forgot where I live now. :puke:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DarthDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-24-09 08:35 PM
Response to Original message
4. Yawn
Edited on Sun May-24-09 08:37 PM by DarthDem
So tired of Nelson. In what sense is he a "leading" Democrat? He doesn't lead anyone, anywhere - - and certainly no Democrats. Ridiculous. Big Ben reminds me of Zell Miller more and more every day - - he's even starting to look like the insane Georgian.

I really, really hope that Obama is not paying attention to this nonsense as regards his selection.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xxqqqzme Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-25-09 03:14 AM
Response to Reply #4
24. my reaction as well
When did nelson become a 'leading' Democrat? Who said so.....other than the talking hairdos @ fixed news?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Number23 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-24-09 08:41 PM
Response to Original message
5. Why on earth are Democrats doing this?
Maybe it was being on Fox that made him sound like such an asshole, but I truly don't understand people's thinking anymore.

Why would a democrat go on record trying to stir up sh*t about the President's SC nominee?? We all know who the nominees are and they are all impressive. Talk about just making sh*t up!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pirate Smile Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-24-09 08:50 PM
Response to Original message
6. "Obama To Nelson: We're Going Around You"
Edited on Sun May-24-09 08:51 PM by Pirate Smile
Obama To Nelson: We're Going Around You

It might not be the most glamorous hill, but it's the one that Sen. Ben Nelson (D-Neb.) has vowed to die on. President Obama, however, isn't going to give him that chance.


Nelson is perhaps the Senate's fiercest protector of subsidies for student lending institutions, which, not coincidentally, are an engine of job growth in Nebraska. He has vowed to block any effort to reduce those subsidies. And given that Democrats have 58 members and generally need 60 to break a GOP filibuster, he can enforce his will on his colleagues.

An agreement struck between the president and House and Senate negotiators won't give Nelson that chance. A process known as "reconciliation" allows budgetary measures to be moved through the Senate with a simple majority, rather than 60. Multiple congressional sources say that congressional Democrats have decided to use reconciliation to go after student-lending subsidies, specifically to get around Nelson.

The Nebraska Democrat has become the bane of liberal bloggers and other progressive activists for his insistence on pushing legislation in a more conservative direction. Nelson's critics will no doubt relish the decision to make his threat of a 'no' vote meaningless.

Nelson spokesman Jake Thompson said that Nelson was not the only target of the reconciliation move and that other members of Congress represented constituents who would also be on the losing end of the reform. He noted that NelNet, the Nebraska student lending institution, employs 1,000 people and those jobs would all be at risk of being shipped to Washington, DC.

"He remains opposed. Whatever strategy he might pursue to exercise that opposition, we're not at that point yet," he said. "Maybe we can work something out."

UPDATE: An important comment from a reader e-mail:

I think the public needs to know exactly what the current student loan program does and why it is such a giveaway to the banks. I think people don´t know, probably because most of the news coverage is about whether or not a bill will pass rather than what it means.

Simply, the current system forces all student loans to be made through banks. The banks charge a medium range of interest--not terribly high, but not terribly low, either. The government GUARANTEES the loans so there is absolutely no risk for the banks.

During Clinton´s term, the student loan plan allowed universities to offer much lower loans by borrowing directly from the government. Students did not have to go through a bank and this shaved 2 or 3 percentage points off the cost of the loan. Neither did it cost the government anything since the money was repaid. But when the Bushies came in, they forced all loans to go through banks, jacking up the interest rates and guaranteeing a profit with no risk for the banks. The government still backed all the loans.

It is a classic example of how lobbying creates direct subsidies for businesses who win their lobbying efforts.


And a second reader writes in with a clarification, as well:

In your update regarding the student lending process through private student lenders, your e-mail commenter suggests that student loans are currently serviced soley through private lenders. This is not correct. The government has been running a direct lending program for years.It may not be used at all universities, but it is in place. Your article suggests otherwise and you may wish to correct the record.


Here is the link for the government's direct loan program: https://www.dl.ed.gov/borrower/BorrowerWelcomePage.jsp

It is important to note: the legislation would convert us from a mixed system to a direct government system. The current system is a huge giveaway to private lenders and the system should be switched over to the cheaper direct lending program ran by the Education department. However, you should portray an accurate picture of the current system.

Thanks for your attention to this issue!


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/04/24/obama-to-nelson-were-goin_n_191201.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
usregimechange Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-24-09 08:53 PM
Response to Original message
7. Like the Justices that decided Brown v Board?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jefferson_dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-24-09 08:59 PM
Response to Reply #7
10. Nine so-called "activists" right there.
After all, nowhere in the Constitution does it actually say justices have it in their power to overturn state-sanctioned Jim Crow.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
marylanddem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-24-09 08:54 PM
Response to Original message
8. When will our President read these fuckers the riot act?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rasputin1952 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-24-09 08:59 PM
Response to Original message
9. That's the 2nd time today the man I worked hard to get re-elected...
embarrased me, and the people of Nebraska.

There are enough "activist" GOP judges on the Bench now. Nelson had better get his head out of his butt and start working for the country as a whole.

:grr:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
firedupdem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-24-09 10:20 PM
Response to Reply #9
18. There has to be a better choice next time....even in this red state...
he's already said he'll oppose any public health care plan as well. He is horrible. :grr:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rasputin1952 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-24-09 10:32 PM
Response to Reply #18
19. He told us he would not run again...
I thought he'd lighten up since this was his last hurrah, guess I was wrong...:(

I also have Fortenberry, satan's little serf...:grr:

E-Mails are flying today!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
firedupdem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-24-09 10:40 PM
Response to Reply #19
20. He's a real jerk...I think I have Fortenberry too. Well he called
the other day about something...I hung up before the recording was finished. :)

Ras....You need to run! I'll help you!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-25-09 12:20 PM
Response to Reply #9
26. Why do you think he's going out of his way to talk like this?
Do you think he's talking a big PR game so he can seem like he "compromised" when he eventually votes for Pres. Obama's nominee?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Thrill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-24-09 09:10 PM
Response to Original message
11. "We don't want to have to read judges' minds" This from someone who voted for Roberts
The guy who wouldn't answe straight forward questions.

I hope whoever Obama nominates, goes back and watches how he did his confirmation hearings.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
chill_wind Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-24-09 09:18 PM
Response to Original message
12. "Activist judges"--- pure Bush/Cheney/Limbaugh RW lingo. Nelson's not even pretending
to be a Democrat any more.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
paulk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-24-09 09:28 PM
Response to Original message
13. I don't think Ben Nelson can really be considered a moderate
Democrat

he's certainly well to the right of the Dem mainstream

and the "leading" bit is MSM spin

I hope Obama gives this guy no credibility

we don't need him to put a liberal in the Supreme Court
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
provis99 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-24-09 09:52 PM
Response to Original message
14. Ben Nelson. What a surprise.
Hey, the Republicans gave us Specter; how about we trade them Ben Nelson in return?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Better Believe It Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-24-09 09:59 PM
Response to Original message
15. Of course Senator Nelson along with most Democratic Senators voted for Bush's "non-activist" picks
Edited on Sun May-24-09 10:00 PM by Better Believe It
Are people finally figuring out that a conservative Republican/Democratic majority run the Senate and that the head of this bi-partisan coalition against liberals/progressives is headed by the conservative Mormon Senator from Nevada, Reid?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
depakid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-25-09 01:05 AM
Response to Reply #15
23. Exactly
Edited on Mon May-25-09 01:07 AM by depakid
When this guy's time comes, the Dems either need to primary him- or give him NO support and let him fend for himself against a fellow Repoublican- one who actually has an "R" behind his name.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DarthDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-25-09 10:35 PM
Response to Reply #23
28. And . . .

Get Reid out of that leadership post. Jesus. He has been an UNMITIGATED disaster.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SemiCharmedQuark Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-25-09 12:30 PM
Response to Reply #15
27. Only 22 Dems voted against Roberts--Clinton, Obama and Biden among them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DarthDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-25-09 10:51 PM
Response to Reply #27
29. Yup
With the exception of Reid's obligatory nay, that vote breakdown is actually a pretty good indicator of who the best Dems in the Senate are/were at that time:

Akaka (D-HI)
Bayh (D-IN) (actually, this surprises me - - probably did it with an eye to 2008)
Biden (D-DE)
Boxer (D-CA)
Cantwell (D-WA)
Clinton (D-NY)
Corzine (D-NJ)
Dayton (D-MN)
Durbin (D-IL)
Feinstein (D-CA)
Harkin (D-IA)
Inouye (D-HI)
Kennedy (D-MA)
Kerry (D-MA)
Lautenberg (D-NJ)
Mikulski (D-MD)
Obama (D-IL)
Reed (D-RI)
Reid (D-NV)
Sarbanes (D-MD)
Schumer (D-NY)
Stabenow (D-MI)


I bet Amy Klobuchar, who succeeded Dayton, would have voted against Roberts. Not sure about Ben Cardin, who succeeded Sarbanes. By the way, here were the nays against ScAlito:

Akaka (D-HI)
Baucus (D-MT)
Bayh (D-IN)
Biden (D-DE)
Bingaman (D-NM)
Boxer (D-CA)
Cantwell (D-WA)
Carper (D-DE)
Chafee (R-RI)
Clinton (D-NY)
Dayton (D-MN)
Dodd (D-CT)
Dorgan (D-ND)
Durbin (D-IL)
Feingold (D-WI)
Feinstein (D-CA)
Harkin (D-IA)
Inouye (D-HI)
Jeffords (I-VT)
Kennedy (D-MA)
Kerry (D-MA)
Kohl (D-WI)
Landrieu (D-LA)
Lautenberg (D-NJ)
Leahy (D-VT)
Levin (D-MI)
Lieberman (D-CT)
Lincoln (D-AR)
Menendez (D-NJ)
Mikulski (D-MD)
Murray (D-WA)
Nelson (D-FL)
Obama (D-IL)
Pryor (D-AR)
Reed (D-RI)
Reid (D-NV)
Rockefeller (D-WV)
Salazar (D-CO)
Sarbanes (D-MD)
Schumer (D-NY)
Stabenow (D-MI)
Wyden (D-OR)


It's fun to read that full vote list - - the vote was on January 31, 2006 - - and look at all the names of the defeated/disgraced (DeWine, the despicable Liddy Dole, Wide Stance Larry) and soon-to-be defeated (Burr, Bunning) Goopers.

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=109&session=2&vote=00002
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kingofalldems Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-24-09 10:04 PM
Response to Original message
16. He's a Fox News Democrat
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
QueenOfCalifornia Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-24-09 10:11 PM
Response to Original message
17. An example of another
"Democrat" In Name Only.

DINO.

But here... a lot of people would tell you and me to go ahead and vote for the ass just because there is a "D" next to their name.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ruggerson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-25-09 12:26 AM
Response to Original message
21. wow he's even adopted Republican talking points
I imagine we will soon see him talking about the "Democrat" party.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
vaberella Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-25-09 12:27 AM
Response to Original message
22. Why doesn't O do this...Why doesn't he do that...Obviously b/c there are Dems who want him to fail.
n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Canuckistanian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-25-09 12:15 PM
Response to Original message
25. What is an "activist" judge, anyways?
If you apply the standard of overturning past decisions, then Scalia and the other conservative members of the court are MORE "activist".

So what standard do they use?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed May 15th 2024, 07:54 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC