Senate confirms controversial court nominee Southwick.
By on Oct 24th, 2007 at 11:49 am
Senate confirms controversial court nominee Southwick.
The Senate today voted 59-38 to confirm Leslie Southwick to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. His nomination was opposed by major civil rights organizations, who criticized his “racially insensitive” writings. More on Southwick’s controversial past HERE.
UPDATE: Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) delivered remarks, urging his colleagues to vote no.
UPDATE II: The roll call on the cloture vote is here.
View Most Popular
Advertisement
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Afghanistan
Bachmann
Beck
Boehner
Business
Cheney
Civil Rights
Congress
Corporate Ethics
Dobbs
Economy
Education
Election
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
Gingrich
Glenn Beck
Global Warming
Health Care
Immigration
International Relations
Justice
LGBT
Lieberman
Limbaugh
Media
Military
O'Reilly
Obama
Palin
Pelosi
Politics
Race
Radical Right
Religion
Sports
Steele
Stimulus
Tea Parties
Tea Party
Terrorism
Veterans
Women's Rights
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
Reports
In-depth studies on select topics
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
ArchivesBlog Roll
Sometimes I think some Congresspeople need to see a video of the nominee shooting puppies in the face before they’d reject a nominee that has popular support on the Right.
October 24th, 2007 at 11:54 amObviously some Democrats had no problem confirming. Buncha Bush enablers, all of ‘em.
October 24th, 2007 at 11:54 amThis is why Joe Lieberman should be booted from the party. He enables other weak-kneed dems.
October 24th, 2007 at 11:57 amWhen racists and advocates of torture can pass approval by a majority of Congress, once has to ask, “Just how bad does a nominee have to be” for this Congress to not give them the job?
October 24th, 2007 at 11:59 amDiane Feinstein is a liar, or her office staff is, take your pick. They’ve told me repeatedly over this past week she would vote against Southwick.
Words fail me sometimes, so I won’t use the curses that come to mind…
October 24th, 2007 at 11:59 amMeanwhile, Turkey is bombing Iraq.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/huff-wires/20071024/turkey-iraq/
October 24th, 2007 at 12:03 pmy’know…
i came back to this country because i thought (hoped) things were going to get better with the dems in the majority.
this place is going down the tubes. the dems have no spines, they can’t even get the upper hand on an extremely unpopular president who a majority of americans think is a lame duck. it makes me have to ask the question: is america worth fighting for? i think i’m just going to have to consider leaving for good.
October 24th, 2007 at 12:08 pmSo, if Harry Reid can’t hold the team together, why exactly is he Majority Leader?
October 24th, 2007 at 12:15 pmWhy did they even consider his nomination?
October 24th, 2007 at 12:21 pm#5 and #8 above — what they said.
October 24th, 2007 at 12:22 pmwe don’t need any more of Harry “urging”
we need someone to LEAD
October 24th, 2007 at 12:26 pmupheld the reinstatement, without any punishment whatsoever, of a white state employee who was fired for calling an African American co-worker a ‘good ole ‘N’word*’”…effectively ratified a hearing officer’s opinion that the slur … “was in effect calling the individual a ‘teacher’s pet.’” “The Southwick majority also affirmed the determination of the hearing officer who said the use of the term good old ‘N’ word…was in this context about as offensive as calling someone ‘a good old boy or Uncle Tom or chubby or fat or slim.’
*Edited for the good reasons.
And they Confirmed this bigot? Nice to know that the Senate is so intouch with reality.
Buck Fush
October 24th, 2007 at 12:27 pmTCDon you are too funny. You’re sitting in a pile of shit and think you smell roses.
October 24th, 2007 at 12:32 pmDems (or those who caucus with them) who voted yes:
Akaka
Byrd
Conrad
Dorgan
Feinstein
Johnson
Lieberman
Lincoln
Nelson
Pryor
No Rs voted no. In addition, Carper, Inouye, and Salazar voted for cloture, but voted against the nominee. If those three had voted against cloture, the nomination would have successfully been filibustered (though this is dependent on whether they need 60 votes period, or just 60% of voters, as three people – Dodd, Boxer, and Kennedy – didn’t vote on either vote)
October 24th, 2007 at 12:38 pmAnother day, another humiliation for the Democratic leadership. Such a strong masochistic streak.
October 24th, 2007 at 12:43 pmWhat’s controversial about this nominee? He wouldn’t support the left’s litmus test of how to rule on specific issues? Guess what, no legitimate judge would tell you how they would rule on any issue until it comes before the court. Until then, you’re just arguing hypotheticals to no avail.
October 24th, 2007 at 12:59 pmNow we know who are the true patriots, the 38 that voted “nay”. Good for them and shame on the other 59.
October 24th, 2007 at 1:00 pmBuckie Boy #13
Every assertion you made is FALSE. These are leftist talking points. I challenge you to ACTUALLY read the judge’s opinions. Your eyes will open, and you will be ashamed of your post. Geez, quit regurgitating the talking points of the left!!
October 24th, 2007 at 1:01 pmFeinstein?!?!
October 24th, 2007 at 1:03 pmWTF???
The Democrat establishment turned against Joe Lieberman a long time ago. His constituency did not.
Comment by O. Bigfoot — October 24, 2007 @ 12:26 pm
Shows how much you know! He won by getting all of the state’s Repub votes (the Repug candidate received almost no party support and had pathetic numbers). Oh, and it sure didn’t hurt that the Repub party poured money into his campaign and that he has a lot of fans in the Jewish community due to his support for Israel.
“Ira Forman, executive director of the National Jewish Democratic Council (NJDC) said, “He can raise the money†to run a campaign. “There is a pro-Israel network of folks who are going to give to Lieberman because of his friendship to the Jewish community and because of who he is.”
October 24th, 2007 at 1:04 pmIf one want’s post’s from the reich they should hang out at redstate not TP…The only reich winged post’s here are from troll’s…Are you lost .? or just another troll.
October 24th, 2007 at 1:08 pm#25 Mary
Boy, are you WRONG. He won 1/3 of the Dems votes and half the Independents’ votes. It was a landslide over his opponents and the mainstream Dems voted overwhelmingly for Lieberman. The only votes he didn’t get were from the far-left radicals who hijacked the media into thinking that Lamont had a chance.
Here’s the link showing the data:
http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2006/pages/results/states/CT/S/01/epolls.0.html
October 24th, 2007 at 1:10 pmWhassamater Witch1–can’t stand having your talking points handily refuted?
“Those who march in lockstep to a drummer without noting the opposing viewpoints” deserve what they get. Open your mind and be a good citizen, not a talking point puppet.
October 24th, 2007 at 1:12 pmsomething passed with 59 votes? but that’s unpossible!
October 24th, 2007 at 1:19 pmDorgan and Feinstein, most distressing
October 24th, 2007 at 1:24 pmHa ha, man are you ever good at deluding yourself!
1/3 of the Dem votes equals keeping his constituency?
1/3 of the Dem votes equals “mainstream Dems voted overwhelmingly for Lieberman”?
Does that mean that only 1/3 of Connecticut’s registered Democrats are “mainstream”?
That’s some great self-brainwashing you’re practicing over there.
October 24th, 2007 at 1:26 pmMary, no delusions here! Just refuting your point that he won only because he pulled only Republican votes. Where I come from, 1/3 of the Democratic constituency is a pretty fair turnout/representation of that party. It completely refutes your talking point that he only enjoys support from Republicans.
Oh, and don’t forget that he overwhelmingly took the Independent vote as well. All in all, I stand by my assertions b/c they’re based on facts. Your assertions failed for lack of evidence.
Next!…
October 24th, 2007 at 1:31 pmpulling “1/3 of the Democratic constituency” will also lose you a two-person democratic primary.
October 24th, 2007 at 1:49 pmThe Democrats are killing themselves with capitulation after capitulation. They censure their own base. It’s the Republicans who are destroying America’s insitutions, trashing the Constitution, provide moral cover for warmongers and dictators and bankrupting the wealth of the nation. But the Democrats appear eager to help.
October 24th, 2007 at 2:05 pm#25 Mary
Boy, are you WRONG. He won 1/3 of the Dems votes and half the Independents’ votes. It was a landslide over his opponents and the mainstream Dems voted overwhelmingly for Lieberman. The only votes he didn’t get were from the far-left radicals who hijacked the media into thinking that Lamont had a chance.
Here’s the link showing the data:
http://www.cnn.com/ ELECTION/ 2006/ pages/ results/ states/ CT/ S/ 01/ epolls.0.html
Comment by JT — October 24, 2007 @ 1:10 pm
Look again. Lamont got 65% of Democrats’ votes, 69% of lliberals’ votes.
October 24th, 2007 at 2:12 pmHe got 70% of Republicans’ votes; 54% of Independents.
Once again you fall for Dems putting up a false front, while letting Bush administration policy slide through.
Reps own you!
October 24th, 2007 at 2:51 pmRepublicans hate facts
Quit being a jerk and calling everybody who is capable of original thought “idiots.” Your attempts to bully those who don’t agree with you won’t work.
October 24th, 2007 at 4:11 pmWhat’s controversial about this nominee? He wouldn’t support the left’s litmus test of how to rule on specific issues? Guess what, no legitimate judge would tell you how they would rule on any issue until it comes before the court. Until then, you’re just arguing hypotheticals to no avail.
Comment by JT — October 24, 2007 @ 12:59 pm
No stupid shit ; “the left’s litmus test” are candidates that do not have pre-conceived notions and bias that will influence a decision.
Why do you think that most intelligent individuals were against Assholito and Chief Jerkoff Roberts ?
Because their idiotic religious beliefs already have made decisions on certain topics before they ever review/hear a case .
Get your head out of your stupid ass ; you’re suffocating yourself , and you don’t have any spare brain cells from the looks of it to be able to afford that……..
October 24th, 2007 at 4:17 pmRepublicans hate facts
Quit being a jerk and calling everybody who is capable of original thought “idiots.†Your attempts to bully those who don’t agree with you won’t work.
Comment by JT — October 24, 2007 @ 4:11 pm
Neither does you trying to appear intelligent and/or competent ; you must be a Chimpy administration employee……….
October 24th, 2007 at 4:18 pmJT, I’m going to dogpile you too.
“No stupid shit ; “the left’s litmus test†are candidates that do not have pre-conceived notions and bias that will influence a decision.”
‘Stupid Shit’ = An Ad Hominem Attack. That is virtually an admission in an academic debate that you’ve lost the debate, but I’m going to let it slide.
Suppose you had a 45 vote minority, and a democratic President selected a candidate for Judge that:
1) Vocally favored granting same-sex partners a ‘domestic partnership’ of some kind, whether it be that or true marriage.
2) Vocally favored Roe vs. Wade.
3) Favored the Fairness Doctrine
4) Favored a slew of other left-wing positions
If you advocate filibustering his nomination, which I am certain you would, you are a hypocrite.
Everyone has preconceived notions on which they act on. Even the most judicious of Justices sees the laws in the context of his own beliefs. To argue that any doesn’t is to lie…which is of course something the Right is very good at, which you are definitely a member of. Lovely how you get so High and Mighty ™ over a vote the Left feels didn’t go its way.
Don’t be surprised when we laugh your sanctimoniously snivelling ass off our message boards.
October 24th, 2007 at 4:31 pmIt’s good to see that some things don’t change with Robert Byrd. I wonder if he is going to be buried in his dress sheets.
October 24th, 2007 at 4:46 pmI have given up. I surrender. I am through with politics. Both my senators did the right thing and voted NAY on this BUSHIE SYCOPHANT! but what good did it do? where was the fillibuster? where is the outrage from Clinton, Edwards, Kennedy, Obama, ….hello??….oh
October 25th, 2007 at 8:07 amand I am proud to be an environmentalist and animal lover, and knowing how this world is going., if there was a video of something that that person thinks would make Republicans wake up, they are wrong: I think it would be a big hit in today’s world as “entertainment” and source of many sick jokes as I heard Jay Leno make on Michael Vick and dogfighting. Don’t say people care more about animals., give me a break….Most people care about one thing $$$$$$$$$$$. I may be cynical., etc., etc., but something has gone drasticallly wrong…..in many ways. No wonder psychiatrists are having a booming business.