Democrats want to circumvent the Constitution

Thanks to RadioBlogger We have a transcript of last Thursday's ralley sponsored by MoveOn.org where California's Democratic Senator Barbara boxer had this to say:

"Why would we give lifetime appointments to people who earn up to $200,000 a year, with absolutely a great retirement system, and all the things all Americans wish for, with absolutely no check and balance except that one confirmation vote. So we're saying we think you ought to get nine votes over the 51 required. That isn't too much to ask for such a super important position. There ought to be a super vote. Don't you think so? It's the only check and balance on these people. They're in for life. They don't stand for election like we do, which is scary."

No Senator I don't think so, and neither did the framers of the Constitution. Senator, why don't you stagger over and wrench that tattered copy of the U.S. Constitution out of Senator (Grand Dragon) Byrd's pocket and check out Article II. Section 2. Clause 2:

"Article. II.
Section. 2.
Clause 2: He (the president) shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments."


If all those big words confuse you Senator let me point out a couple of particulars there. First the only vote mentioned in that clause that requires a super majority vote is the Presidents ability to make treaties. All the other appointments listed there: Ambassadors, Ministers, Consuls, Judges, and other Officers require only the Advice and Consent of the Senate. That means a simple majority Senator.

But then you already knew that didn't you? Since you just admited that there is only a 51 vote requirement. If you and the rest of the Senate Minority want to change the Constitution to require a super-majority vote for Judges - than change the Constitution. Stop trying to circumvent it for your own political agenda. Article V will tell you how to legally enact the changes you are trying to impose now. And trust me Article V does not mention the word filibuster.