CBS and Ken Starr
There's an interesting post at Patterico's Pontifications about the CBS report on Ken Starr's comments regarding filibusters of judicial nominees and "the nuclear option."
The CBS report on Starr's comments, and the wide commentary that followed the report, was troubling because it seemed so out of character for Starr. Patterico makes a good case that CBS purposely distorted Starr's comments, and he reinforces his argument by quoting an e-mail circulated by Starr himself.
Patterico also provides the transcript of the CBS report. Gloria Borger, the CBS correspondent, repeated the partisan Democrat distortion that Republicans "are threatening to end the age-old filibuster, where any senator can threaten to stop any vote just by continuously talking." What they're really trying to end is filibusters designed to deny judicial nominees an up-or-down vote on the Senate floor, which is much narrower, more reasonable, and consistent with two centuries of Senate tradition and practice.
Looks like there hasn't been much change at CBS since Dan Rather got his comeuppance.
The CBS report on Starr's comments, and the wide commentary that followed the report, was troubling because it seemed so out of character for Starr. Patterico makes a good case that CBS purposely distorted Starr's comments, and he reinforces his argument by quoting an e-mail circulated by Starr himself.
Patterico also provides the transcript of the CBS report. Gloria Borger, the CBS correspondent, repeated the partisan Democrat distortion that Republicans "are threatening to end the age-old filibuster, where any senator can threaten to stop any vote just by continuously talking." What they're really trying to end is filibusters designed to deny judicial nominees an up-or-down vote on the Senate floor, which is much narrower, more reasonable, and consistent with two centuries of Senate tradition and practice.
Looks like there hasn't been much change at CBS since Dan Rather got his comeuppance.
2 Comments:
Regarding the president's judicial nominees, the Senate is supposed to serve an "advise and consent" role in the process. There should be an up/down vote. Delaying it is not what they're there for.
It's bizarre that the entire contents of Starr's alledged email haven't actually made their way out. I've seen snippets at Rush Limbaugh's website, Powerline and a few other places. But noone seems to have the whole thing out there. I find that odd.
Second, the Republicans ARE threatening to end the filibuster. That's not a distortion. It won't just be for judicial nominees. Once the filibuster is gone..it's gone for legislation as well.
It is the role of the Senate to provide advice and CONSENT. But it's also the role of the Senate to keep the majority from steamrolling the minority. That's not good enough for Republicans, apparently.
Post a Comment
<< Home