- Top Features:
- War Room
- Glenn Greenwald
- Broadsheet
- Joan Walsh
- Camille Paglia
- Since You Asked
- Follow Salon:
Letters posted here are associated with the following article:
The letters thread is now closed.
There are currently 44 Democrats in the Senate. We need 7 more Democrats, not 9, because you are forgetting one thing in your analysis: Control of the Judiciary Committee.
While it is true that some additional Democrats in the Senate would be anti-abortion, and quite possibly to the right on other social issues, the first hurdle is the Judiciary Committee. We lost that round 10-8. Add 2 more progressive Democratic Senators to the JC, and we can stop the nominatons before they ever get to the Senate floor.
Chris
Henderson, NV
"Of the 33 Senate seats up for election this year, 25 are currently held by senators who voted down the filibuster."
If the democrats in the 25 who voted down filibuster were not up for election in Nov, would they have voted for filibuster?
I am going to bet that many of them are the usuall weak kneed move to the middle democrats that don't want to seem to strident before election season heats up. Especially those Senators in 50/50 states like (WA and NM). Not excusing Cantwell, but I'm sure she is going to be able to use this to stay on the good side of Pro-choice, but not seem like a radical.
Its dissapointing that she couldn't have stood up for filibuster using bush's corruption and possible legal cases and Alito's strong president views as the reason not to vote for him.
Not saying that Pro Choice shouldn't be a reason, only that it seems it moved to the forefront as the only reason to vote against Alito, which will turn off some voters in 50/50 states.
