Boxer Inadvertently Tells The Truth On Judicial Appointments

Annie

Diamond Member
Nov 22, 2003
50,848
4,827
1,790
Yes, you can get the link to the audio at the site:

http://www.radioblogger.com/#000539

Thursday, March 17

Now the truth comes out.

The dumbest member of the United States Senate, California's very own Barbara Boxer, took to the podium next, and did something remarkable. She forgot to keep up the lie. She told the truth about the strategy of the Democrats. She let what their view of the Constitution truly is. If Rose Woods, Richard Nixon's legendary secretary, worked at either MoveOn or C-span, the following part of the tape would be missing:

Why would we give lifetime appointments to people who earn up to $200,000 a year, with absolutely a great retirement system, and all the things all Americans wish for, with absolutely no check and balance except that one confirmation vote. So we're saying we think you ought to get nine votes over the 51 required. That isn't too much to ask for such a super important position. There ought to be a super vote. Don't you think so? It's the only check and balance on these people. They're in for life. They don't stand for election like we do, which is scary.

No kidding. She said it. Here's the audio so you don't have to look for it in an hour and a half audio file.

Boxer audio

In one small paragraph, if this passage gets picked up around the 'sphere and on radio, the Democrats just lost their argument. The truth of the matter is it is the Democrats who indeed are changing the Constitutional requirement, because Democrats like Barbara Boxer don't think the current political makeup is fair. Not only should there be a supermajority, which is clearly unconstitutional, but appointed judges should stand for elections. I wonder if that weathered, pocket-sized edition of the Constitution did backflips in Robert Byrd's shirt pocket when she said that.

Game over. Dems lose. Spread the truth far and wide, bloggers.
 
gop_jeff said:
Good article, except he's wrong about one thing. The dumbest US Senator is not Boxer, it's Patty Murray.

Point taken under advisement. :laugh: :thup:

What about Durbin? :dev1:
 
JESUS H F'ING CHRIST!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
:bang3: :bang3: :bang3: :bang3:

stupid ass democrats and their idiocy at trying to appeal to stupid ass constituents can't even stick to the real damn story about any damn thing!!!!!!!!!!

:bang3: :bang3: :bang3: :bang3: :blowup:
 
Bonnie said:
:rotflmao: :rotflmao:

And I think Carol Mosely Braun takes dumbest in that category.. :teeth:

Well, yeah! Even Illinois didn't return her.
 
manu1959 said:
ted kennedy is the dumberest....he thinks no one knows he is a silver spoon drunk

Nah Kenndy is just the drunkest.......although he is quite senile at this point. :cof:
 
guess what libs? The constitution is the FRICKN' CONSTITUTION. Meaning that if you don't like the law of the land, TOO FRICKN' BAD. The so-called Nuclear Option is perfectly legal and constitutional in every sense. Just because libs don't like something doesn't make it illegal. There are exactly 7 instanses spelled out in the constitution where a supermajority is required. Appointment of judges IS NOT ONE OF THEM. Don't like it? TOUGH. I don't like the fact that babies are getting their brains sucked out in the womb because some irresponsible woman decides she'd rather not raise a child. But its the LAW, you know, that thing that says what you can and can't do. Work to change it if you don't like it. But enough with this "living document" horseshit. The constitution means what it says, not what some moonbat senator thinks it means.
 
-=d=- said:
I feel dumb, because I don't really understand why what she said is bad...help?

She wants to rewrite the constitution. The timing is funny though, she wants to rewrite it now to keep bush's nominees out.
 
A day or so ago, one of our members posted quite a few quotes from Democrats - most notably Ted Kennedy in 1975 - saying that Senate rules such as the filibuster are by no means carved in stone. For some folks, the truth seems rather fluid - not to say convenience-driven - wouldn't you say?
 

Forum List

Back
Top