Estrada nomination

[LA_MERC_Dirge]

Okay, I like this new forum. I am curious to this event that is not getting that much press because of world politics.

1) What is your stance on Estrada? Would you vote for or against his nomination?

2) How do you feel about Mary Landrieu's (D-LA) rescind of her commercial (run on hispanic radio) claiming support for Estrada that she ran during her re-election campaign in November 2003?

[LA_MERC_LaTech]

Eric Estrada?

[Cypher]

What's this you speak of?

Sounds like politics... should've called this thread "Dirge's Den" or something like that.

I'm going far, far, far, far away from here. No offense, Dirgey :)

[LA_MERC_Dirge]

Miguel Estrada... lol


Come back Cypher!

[LA_MERC_MadMAX]

I'm going away too...lol. It's for the good of my friendships here at LA_MERC that me, former History/PolSci major, and most opinionated person I know stay far, far, far away from the political discussions....

And I vote for Eric Estrada...w00t! And like Cypher, no offince.

[LA_MERC_LaTech]

Ok,

I've read a little (very little mind you) on Estrada. I am basing my opinon SOLELY on what I have read.

He should be let in. 1) He's qualified for the job. 2) The President backs him. 3) He's a conservative.

It's no real wonder that the Dems are trying to block him.
Then again, they fought against a filibuster before...why are they trying it with him?

Patrick Leahy (Vt.), the senior Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee: "I have stated over and over again ... that I would object and fight against any filibuster on a judge, whether it is somebody I opposed or supported." (Congressional Record, June 18, 1998)

Ted Kennedy (Mass.): Senators who feel strongly about the issue of fairness should vote for cloture, even if they intend to vote against the nomination itself. It is wrong to filibuster this nomination, and Senators who believe in fairness will not let a minority of the Senate deny [the nominee] his vote by the entire Senate." (Congressional Record, June 21, 1995)

Barbara Boxer (Calif.): ["The nominee"] deserves his day. And filibustering this nomination is keeping him from his day." (Congressional Record, June 21, 1995)

Just my limited views on this topic that I know almost nothing about.

[[Cajun] BigEasy]

Part of the controversy surrounding him is the lack of information he has given on his personal views. I believe when asked about Roe v Wade, he asnwered with "No comment." How can a judge hoping to be granted such a high position not have an opinion on such a landmark case? I believe we have a right to know his stance.

[LA_MERC_Dirge]

Well I'm going to hold my fianl judgement on that, but in answer to you big easy: He is being nominated for a position which would put him into ethical conflict by answering such questions. He did the right thing by making no comment. I do not think you have to look hard to find the way he really feels. More to come on the whole thing.

[LA_MERC_Dirge]

For Big easy and anyone else interested:

http://www.nationalreview.com/york/york022503.asp


I know it's a little long and is from the White House, but it raises questions as to what the real reason behind the stonewalling is.

[wookie]

hey, vote for me.

[Cypher]

Ah geez, why did I click on this thread again?!? I've already been here, it just hurts my head.