Skip to content

Monthly Archives: November 2003

I’m broken

Really. That abdominal machine at the gym is a killer. That plus the rowing weight machine (which crunched my intercostals real good) have put me more or less out of commission, though running might not be out of the question.
This reminds me of that old Pantera song (circa 1994) “I’m Broken.” A year or two [...]

I need…

John Belushi: I logged a lot of miles training for that day. And I downed a lot of doughnuts. Little Chocolate Donuts. They taste good, and they’ve got the sugar I need to get me going in the morning. That’s why Little Chocolate Donuts have been on my training table since I was a kid.

Wow

For one day (er, night), I out-blogged Lisa Chau.
Word.
That won’t happen again, probably.

A draft: don’t tell Jon G.

(770 words so far. no proofing yet)
This morning, we know for sure: the Senate Republicans are serious about President Bush?s judicial nominees.
There had been some question. Up until 6 PM last night, all the Majority Leader Bill Frist and his staff had to offer was talk. We heard from the Senator?s senior advisor that [...]

Lindsay Graham’s point

“A lot of thought went into supermajority votes.” These things were done for a reason when the Constitution was drafted. That’s why 2/3 of the Senate is needed for treaties and other matters. Omission doesn’t imply consent.
On the issue of precedent, even Sen Corzine admits the Democrats’ radical strategy in an email to donors: he [...]

Boxer’s back

Note to Democrats: it’s not about getting “100 percent of what you want.” If the principle of the 3 percent voted down matters, than that’s that. If one believes that judicial filibusters are unconstitutional or unfair or, perhaps even, have a deletarious effect on potential nominees and those awaiting justice, then one is too many. [...]

Session lectures

He’s got the Senate glossary out.
Freep’s got over 2,000 comments so far on the filibuster marathon.
Hmmm. It’s never good when you get into dictionary definitions and semantic piddling. But still, that’s really what this comes down to. “Advise and consent.”

Hutchinson on Kuhl: a Paul Harvey moment

The breast exam story: “look at the rest of the story.”
While Kuhl dismissed the drug company from the case, the doctor, who was also sued, lost. Kuhl allowed the case to go forward against the doctor.

Sessions recalls the Clinton years

When Orin Hatch struck down a judicial filibuster and the nominees got a vote. Remember that, Mr. Schumer? Mis-remembers is more like it: there was a vote. That can’t be disputed; the nominees are now judges!
Blame it on Bob Smith?
And a hold is not a fake-out filibuster, as Schumer contends. Holds are part of [...]

Boxer

On Kuhl: Breast cancer case, regarding a drug salesman being in the room when a mastectomy patient was undergoing examination–the patient sued the drug company and Kuhl ruled for the drug company. It’s not clear to me what the legal question of the case would have been exactly, but that’s what matters. And Boxer trying [...]