Rules of the game? Democrats don’t need no stinking rules says Sun editor

Today the Sun’s putative editor Brian Greenspun took to the front page of his newspaper to berate, bellow and bombast over Sen. Dean Heller’s decision to “blue slip” the nomination for federal judge of Clark Country District Court Judge Elissa Cadish.

Greenspun accused Heller of creating a “constitutional crisis” for political gain.

He pointed out that both his paper’s editorial page and that of the Review-Journal had called on Heller to give Cadish, nominated by Sen. Harry Reid to fill the U.S. District Court seat being left vacant by Judge Philip Pro taking senior judge status, a hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Brian Greenspun

Heller has used a traditional Senate privilege to block such a hearing.

Though coy at first about his reasoning, he since has cited a questionnaire she had filled out when running for her current seat on the state bench in 2008. When asked whether the Second Amendment guarantees an individual right to keep and bear arms, she replied, “I do not believe that there is this constitutional right. Thus, I believe that reasonable restrictions may be imposed on gun ownership in the interest of public safety. Of course, I will enforce the laws as they exist as a judge.”

Reid has refused to withdraw Cadish’s nomination.

There are litmus tests in politics, and this appears to be one for Heller, who was quoted by the R-J as saying, “I’m a supporter of the Second Amendment. I support the Constitution. I believe it’s a constitutional right, not a case-by-case right.”

But Greenspun fulminated, “Nothing surprises me about how low any politician will go to feed red meat, however tainted, to any part of his base. But in this case, he has gone too far. And he has done so for the very reason that the Tea Party, the independents and the vast majority of people in both major political parties say they are so sick and tired of politicians.”

Advise and consent be damned!

The editor even invoked the First Amendment, “You know, the one that says every American has the right to his or her own opinion. And the right to express it.”

I guess that was what Greenspun was doing back in 2003 when he used his column, called “Where I Stand,” because an R-J editor once had a column called “Where I Sit,” to sing the praises of Harry Reid for … you know where this is going … blocking via filibuster the selection of a half dozen Republican federal judge nominees.

Back then, he compared Reid to Jimmy Stewart’s character in “Mr. Smith Goes to Washington,” because Reid filibustered for eight and half hours, often reading from his book about Searchlight.

“It was a classic filibuster that would have made any Hollywood producer proud and, I suspect, did make Nevadans proud,” Greenspun wrote. “Not only because Harry stood up for what he believed but, by doing so, stood up for most Americans who are frustrated at the way our political system seems to be slipping away from the control of the people for whom this government is intended to work.”

Greenspun called the nominees right-wing nutcakes.

“It turns out that these few judges have been hand-picked from the extreme right side of the Republican barrel, people well outside the mainstream or any responsible stream of intelligent thought for the United States of 2003, and people whose lifetime appointment to their posts would cause great havoc in our social and justice system for decades to come,” Greenspun spewed. “Rather than approve these miscasts of judicial temperance, the Senate has decided to just say ‘no’ to any consideration of them.”

So much for that First Amendment right to have an opinion and express it.

It matters not what the rules of the Senate may be or what the principles are or what the Constitution says. It matters only whose side you are on. Brian is always on Harry’s side.

Hypocrisy, thy name in Greenspun.

About these ads

15 comments on “Rules of the game? Democrats don’t need no stinking rules says Sun editor

  1. Vernon Clayson says:

    Much as the ancients believed the sun revolved around the earth,The Sun revolves around Harry Reid, its constancy never varies (stole the last words from a song), however, the Las Vegas Review Journal seldom criticizes him, it’s rather they quietly vacillate in his radiance. I also add their policy with Harry Reid appears partially based on the Hippocratic Oath, “First, do no harm”. Harry Reid likely had good intentions when he first entered Congress, most individuals do that but they all become comfortable, if not intoxicated, with the perquisites and power. Senators seem more susceptible to this than Representatives and early on become one with the gods, no longer man but SENATOR. It still amazes me that Reid, an old and experienced pol was taken in so easily by Obama, heaven help us if Reid still believes it’s still the basic Democrat-Republican thing of his youth. It surely isn’t, it’s far more complex, the Democrat platform and policies are Marxist, every bit the same as established and practiced in socialist Europe, Asia and even many nations in this hemisphere. Harry follows Barry, which must be obvious to Brian Greenspun, which brings up the question of Israel in Brian Greenspun’s opinion. The founder of The Sun, his father was a staunch supporter of Israel, something that Harry Reid has to be well aware of, why doesn’t the younger Greenspun see irony in Harry going along with Barry’s arbitrary and demeaning treatment of Israel, if not going along, certainly not opposing it.

  2. brucefeher says:

    The anti-gun crowd may want to review one of the main reasons Japan feared invading the USA. They were afraid that too many Americans had guns.
    This is still a very good reason for our current enemies not to mess with us.
    Hang tough Senator Heller!

  3. Vernon Clayson says:

    On the comment by brucefeher, It’s too big a stretch to compare the Constitutional issue being discussed to the Japanese reluctance to invade the USA as “too many Americans had guns”. Their reasons were very likely far more militarily pragmatic, their considerations surely involved time, distances and logistics rather than whether private gun ownership would slow their invasion. And how “our current enemies” enters into it is beyond me, I don’t know whether he means foreign enemies, who are practically numberless, or the Democrats wanting to sit a judge that has stated she disagrees with those that believe the Constitution gives the right for private ownership. I like that Senator Heller has stymied Senator Reid but that’s also a pragmatic decision on his part as Shelly Berkley is breathing down his neck. I favor Heller as much for this reason as I do that it’s better we don’t have another Democrat-cum-liberal/socialist representing us in the Senate. One is more than enough, right after dislodging Obama from office we should hope that the Republicans can gain the majority in the senate so we can dislodge Harry Reid from his role as majority leader.
    Back to the Japanese, “a gun behind every blade of grass”, was a good line, someone may even have said something like that, but Japan had never lost a war, they surely considered far more possibilities than that homily.

  4. Steve says:

    Vernon, the Senate is a toss up but sadly Obama is getting another 4 years to drive this falling Republic into the ground.

  5. Vernon Clayson says:

    Steve, I worry that Obama will repeat and while I would like to see a Republican majority in the Senate I fear they would placate Obama and his dictates much like the Republicans in the House. He has neutered the Congress and the Supreme Court is supreme only in name, they are a hollow and powerless branch that he can ignore if he chooses to. They are only pertinent if the president agrees to their decisions, this health care mandate thing could stretch out longer than Roe vs. Wade and cause even more division. Does anyone believe the Congress would step in and demand anything of him whichever party is in the majority in the Congress when he slides back in?

  6. I thought I was a pessimist, Vernon.

    Of course, we pessimists always have the privilege of being able to say: I told you so.

    ________________________________

  7. Rincon says:

    Thomas, I think this was a great post. Hypocrites deserve to be exposed to the brightest sunlight possible. Greenspun should be ashamed. As for the nomination and filibuster, I don’t believe the Constitution specifies a right to filibuster. Is that correct? If so, I suppose the filibuster must fulfill some purpose, or the Senate would not allow it, but that purpose is a mystery to me. How do you all feel about the idea of filibustering in the first place?

  8. Filibuster is simply a parliamentary procedure for extending debate, sometimes until the other side throws in the towel. In the Senate it effectively creates the need for a supermajority. Nevada requires a supermajority to raise taxes, so it is not “wrong” per se in my opinion. But the Harry and his ilk the rules are subject to change. He wouldn’t allow Bush to make recess appointments, but finds no fault with Obama doing it.

  9. Athos says:

    With Ø, Congress doesn’t have to be out of session for him to make recess appointments. He wipes his butt with the constitution. AND HE TAUGHT CONGRESSIONAL LAW in Chicago!

    I’m getting too old for this nonsense.

  10. [...] also now objects to the filibuster, even though in 2003 he filibustered on the floor of the Senate for eight and a half hours to block a handful of judicial appointments. [...]

  11. [...] from a man who in 2003 filibustered on the floor of the Senate for eight and a half hours to block a handful of judicial appointments. [...]

  12. [...] Rules of the game? Democrats don’t need no stinking rules says … Uncategorized Comments are closed. [...]

  13. [...] without the slightest embarrassment about talking out of both sides of his mouth. He himself has used the filibuster and gotten the praise of the liberal [...]

  14. […] is the same Harry Reid who in 2003 weaponized boredom by filibustering a Bush judicial nominee for eight and half hours, often reading from his book […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s