Should All Dem Senators Vote Against All bush Apointees?

[cali]

Because that's the sense I get from many of you; immediate outrage whenever a dem Senator indicates that s/he's going to vote for a bush apointee. An opposition party needs a strategy, and simply opposing everything and everybody proposed by the majority party is not only counterproductive, it's not a viable strategy. We need every dem we've got, and they're not all going to be liberals. What I want in hearings from dem Senators are tough questions. We're getting that in the Condi hearings, not just from Barbara Boxer, but from Dodd, Feingold, Kerry, and yes, Biden. Presidents have historically been given great leeway when it comes to cabinet apointees. That's not going to change,

The liberal purity test for our elected members of Congress is unrealistic. Practically no one is going to meet it on all occasions.

[Benhurst]

1. Rice is a liar and a war criminal. No American should vote for

her confirmation, Democrat or Republican.

[ixion]

2. if * would happen to nominate someone reasonable

I think it should be considered, albeit not rubber stamped.

Thus far, the people he has chosen to nominate are unethical, fascist thugs, so in that case I think that yes, they should vote against them.

[russian33]

3. Not everybody, but I would feel like an opposition party...

..if they voted against the likes of Gonzalez and Rice.....but to hear that they all going to vote for them anyways, right after they ask a couple of questions...well, that's not opposition in my mind.

[AntiCoup2K4]

4. YES!

We know that Bush is incapable of nominating anybody but neocon shitbags, and it is the GODDAMN JOB of the opposition party to keep these criminal slime like Gonzales and Kindasleasa Lies out. And if the Pukes have enough votes to over ride them, then that's the unfortunate reality. But they don't have to make it easy.

As for Biden, he's a PNAC shitbag, so he has no credibility whatsoever.

[Straight Shooter]

5. I get the sense from bush that he'll appoint the worst candidates possible

That's part of the "strategery," you know. Make it look like the Dems are obstructionists, when in fact bush is offering nothing but poison to America.

[Goldeneye]

6. They have to pick their fights.

I'd rather have them fighting over judicial nominees.

[kslib]

18. Me too.

If we oppose everybody, then the moderate Americans see us as "obstructionist" or partyline voters (translating into not enough votes in '06 or maybe even '08). To get anything accomplished both parties have to at least try to work together, and voting against all the nominees drives the wedge deeper and completely erases any pretense of the majority party's goodwill we MAY have gotten for moderate bills. Save up the opposition to use when it might do some good, like for a really out there judge that some moderate Republicans might also vote against. Yeah, Condi sucks, but the Repubs aren't going to go against her, and we don't have enough votes.

[Ganja Ninja]

7. It isn't about purity. Condi is a total incompetent.

The GOP should appoint her themselves. The Democrats need to take a stand even if it won't effect to end result. They need to take a stand somewhere on something, someday.

[NV Whino]

8. If Bush ever put up anyone but criminals and liers

the Dems (and I) could support them. At this point it is important to oppose any and all of Bush's criminals.

[kentuck]

9. Only those so incompetent and so dishonest that

they disregard intelligence and permit terrorists to bomb our country and kill 3000 of our citizens and then lie to the American people to preemptively invade and kill 100,000 citizens of another country that had nothing to do with the terrorists or 911. Yeah, that should be a disqualifier.

[AverageJoe]

10. Yes

Not only that, but EVERY DAY EVERY ELECTED DEMOCRAT should demand that Bush and his gang of thugs be thrown out of office and jailed.

I'm serious.

The Bush cabal are criminals and enabling them is the wrong thing to do. The only moral choice is to scream their guilt from the rooftops and to work passionately to get them out of power.

[robbedvoter]

11. Only against the criminal ones. Seems excessive to ya?

[cali]

12. Not so much excessive as unrealistic

I can't stand Rice. I understand the desire to see a unanimous rejection of her on the part of the dems. I also realize that it's not going to happen, and I'm not going to jump on the wholesale condemnation wagon of any Senator that doesn't vote against her. I think that's none too productive, and not altogether fair.

[Catchawave]

13. If I could trust Bush, I could trust his admin choices....

...what the Dems are doing in the confirmation hearings is get alot of stuff "on record". Like Obama just stated "we want to make our decisions based on fact not faith"

I'm rather glad we're the opposition party now....Iraq is a mess!

[aden_nak]

14. Unless they are un-Bush-ly, then fuck yes.

We may not like the GOP, but we could sure learn a thing or two about how to build a power base from them. And the first lesson is quite simple. Solidarity, even if defeat seems inevitable.

[rachelbirds]

15. It's nice

theater but we all know who wins in the end of this confirmation hearing. Thr epublicans. Condi Rice will be confirmed this afternoon. If so many Dems think she's incompetent, a liar etc etc why in the world would be confirmed??? It's kind of a let down.

[TheUnspeakable]

17. I can't forget

that our "National Security Advisor" presided over the worst attack
on American soil in history-in spite of TONS of warnings-so she gets a promotion? Not only that-she refuses to take ANY blame-choosing to put the blame on "poor intellegence" while the "intellengence' man,
Tenet, gets a medal-Bizarro World!!

[ktowntennesseedem]

16. They should only oppose the liars and the thieves.

Oh wait, that would be all of them, wouldn't it!?

Seriously, I would like to see them vote no on everything and everyone Chimp sends them, but that would accomplish nothing but to make us look like sore losers and trouble-makers. They will likely get whatever or whoever that want anyway, what with their "mandate" and all. We need a strategy to at least slow down the Bush agenda, since we're in no position to stop it, while at the same time having the appearance of non-partisanship/trying-to-work-together. We've got to ask the tough questions, a la Boxer, and use those exchanges to our benefit down the road.

That is our only hope for opening enough eyes and ears to the corruption in this administration: pointing out to anyone who will listen what kind of plans and what caliber of people the president and his cronies are pushing through. If all we do is object and complain, however, no one will listen to us.

[kslib]

20. right on the mark.

On a similar note, I am beginning to develop a blind love for Boxer now; what a woman!

[trezic]

19. This sounds like the GOP when Clinton was in office

A mass no vote would be a wonderful demonstration of impotence. Good God, the way to beat a wartime president is to be his best friend. "Keep your friends close and your enemies closer?"

This country has survived far more serious challenges in the past. Bush is a cut-rate Nixon.

[mattclearing]

21. Um, well, yeah. If they support Bush, and Bush supports them...

then they deserve no support from Democrats. They have the majority. Let them use it.

Edit to note: Obviously, this doesn't work so well if we have a President but no majority in the Senate, but hey, OUR people won't be trying to rape the middle east, starve the poor, bankrupt SS, healthcare, etc. etc. etc.

Probably not a great precedent, but Condi and Gonzales? These people are nuts. I can't respect someone who votes to confirm them.

[lostnfound]

22. Yes, and it's called a moral compass

You can head north, albeit slowly, by tacking eastnortheast and westnorthwest, but not by going due south.

Compromise may be useful when you actually stand a chance to get something worthwhile out of it, but
1) the Bushies aren't giving the least bit of consideration to opposing views or atempting to balance the public interest
and
2) there are some lines which shouldn't be crossed.