bigwillq
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jan-20-05 08:32 PM
Original message |
Why did only 2 of 8 DEM senators vote against Condi? |
|
Why wasn't it a 10-8 vote?
Is it because of that typical political game of trying to look good in case one hopes to run for higher office?
I've just been wondering about this a lot this week.
|
aquart
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jan-20-05 08:33 PM
Response to Original message |
1. Who were the other six? |
bigwillq
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jan-20-05 08:44 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
6. I think Biden and Feingold were on the committee |
|
But I thought they said it was 10 REP and 8 DEM
|
Freddie Stubbs
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jan-20-05 08:59 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
12. Biden, Feingold, Sarbanes, Dodd, Bill Nelson, and Obama |
aquart
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jan-20-05 09:08 PM
Response to Reply #12 |
Freddie Stubbs
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jan-21-05 12:06 AM
Response to Reply #16 |
38. Maybe he disagrees with some of her views but believes that shes qualified |
flaminbats
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jan-21-05 12:43 AM
Response to Reply #38 |
41. How many of Clinton's appointees were qualified but rejected? |
|
Fighting this administration at every step will only weaken the Republicans. Only one of these Democrats came from a red state, and even that is debatable. For the remaining seven Democrats from blue states, a vote against Condi would only help them politically.
|
Freddie Stubbs
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jan-21-05 06:02 AM
Response to Reply #41 |
43. None of Clinton's cabinet appointees were rejected |
AuntiBush
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jan-20-05 11:40 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
27. Humiliated to say, but... |
|
1 of them was my own Sen. Sarbanes! It's his last year.
You'd think he would have taken a final, last brave stand for Democracy, but nooooooooooo!
I called Senator Boxer and Kerry's office thanking them, emailed them and the letters are in the mail!
|
FreeStateDemocrat
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jan-21-05 06:11 AM
Response to Reply #27 |
44. Has Sarbanes announced he is not seeking another term? |
Freddie Stubbs
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jan-21-05 09:23 AM
Response to Reply #44 |
|
And he actually has a little less then two years left in his term.
|
Chico Man
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jan-20-05 08:33 PM
Response to Original message |
2. That is the anti-strategy |
|
Old fashioned, fake, shallow, and simply iresponsible.
|
Vincardog
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jan-20-05 08:35 PM
Response to Original message |
3. hey know the shrub can get anybody he wants it is the rules |
|
I do not believe anybody should vote for his llying puppet but WTF.
|
DaveinMD
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jan-20-05 08:37 PM
Response to Original message |
|
its not worth wasting political capital on cabinet appointments.
|
matt819
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jan-20-05 08:56 PM
Response to Reply #4 |
|
Do you really think any Democrat will get any consideration on any legislation over the next four years? Not a chance. The repubs have already made that clear, with secret, exclusive committee meetings excluding democrats.
Unless there's a plan to fight this on the floor of the Senate, the fact remains that caving on these appointments gains nothing.
Perhaps there are brighter strategists out there, but my view is that we should start voting down party lines and hope to erode some of the more moderate republicans' support of this mad regime.
|
DaveinMD
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jan-20-05 09:05 PM
Response to Reply #10 |
|
that there are bigger fights ahead. Mainly supreme court justices and stopping privatization of Social Security.
|
AuntiBush
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jan-20-05 11:43 PM
Response to Reply #14 |
|
What happened to standing-up for the voters. I just feel so dis-enfranchised! Sorry, but I'm 1 gal weary of making excuses for those that will not stand-up and be heard for "We, the people that placed them there!"
|
tabasco
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jan-21-05 12:12 AM
Response to Reply #30 |
39. If I were a Senator, I would have one question for Ms. Rice. |
|
Edited on Fri Jan-21-05 12:16 AM by tabasco
"Who was the National Security Advisor on Sept. 11, 2001? "
No further questions and I give the remainder of my time to Senator Boxer.
|
AntiCoup2K4
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jan-20-05 11:45 PM
Response to Reply #14 |
32. Nope. Fight 'em ALL every step of the way. |
|
If the 'Pukes want to call it "obstructionism", SO FUCKING WHAT?
Remember what Newt Gingrich and Bob Dole did to Clinton and the supposedly Democratic congress from Jan 1993 - 1994 theft/election?
They obstructed EVERYTHING. And they obviously didn't suffer for it in the mid term election.
Maybe if there had been a little of that from Daschle & Gephardt in 2001-2002, the last midterm, and maybe even 2004 might have turned out differently.
Keeping Ken Starr or John Asscrotch off the Supreme Court is good, but you don't have to put a war criminal in as attorney general or an incompetent liar as secretary of state in order to do so.
|
In Truth We Trust
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jan-20-05 10:22 PM
Response to Reply #4 |
19. I hope you're being sarcastic. If not then that opinion is truly |
|
unprincipled as are the fucking sellouts who didn't vote according to principle. They are just as bad as the repugs imo.
|
DaveinMD
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jan-20-05 10:28 PM
Response to Reply #19 |
21. you need to know what fights to pick |
|
The real ammo needs to be saved for the fight over privatization of social security and to stop nominations to the Supreme Court. Voting against Cabinet members serves no purpose. So call me a sellout. I don't care. I know what's right.
|
leesa
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jan-20-05 11:37 PM
Response to Reply #21 |
DaveinMD
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jan-20-05 11:40 PM
Response to Reply #25 |
|
but good people can disagree about these things.
|
leesa
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jan-20-05 11:36 PM
Response to Reply #4 |
24. It was extremely important to demonstrate to the American public, and to |
|
the world, that we do not approve of the lying and deceit of Condoleeza Rice and, by extension, Bush. It was an unforgivable sin. They failed us in a terrible, irreparable fashion. Do you not remember how Kerry's voting for the war hurt our cause???? Did your short-term politics only memory fail you???
Your comment is shallow and very, very foolish. It was EXTREMELY important they not support this war-mongering liar. How can you not get it???
|
DaveinMD
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jan-21-05 12:01 AM
Response to Reply #24 |
|
they'd fine someone just as bad. Don't blame the cabinet people. Its Bush that needs to be blamed.
|
AuntiBush
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jan-20-05 11:41 PM
Response to Reply #4 |
|
I'm sorry but Sarbanes should have went w/the vote! It's his last year. He's retiring, so WTF!?!?!
|
DaveinMD
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jan-21-05 12:00 AM
Response to Reply #29 |
36. his chief of staff told me |
|
she doesn't think he's retiring.
|
ynksnewyork2
(138 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jan-20-05 08:38 PM
Response to Original message |
vpigrad
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jan-20-05 08:46 PM
Response to Reply #5 |
|
The better question is why are so many party members afraid to stand-up to Bushie? Why?
|
GreenInNC
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jan-20-05 08:52 PM
Response to Original message |
|
I have more respect for her than any other senator up there. She seems to be the only one fighting.
|
meppie-meppie not
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jan-20-05 08:54 PM
Response to Reply #8 |
9. I so agree with you!!! n/t |
AuntiBush
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jan-20-05 11:47 PM
Response to Reply #8 |
|
She stood-up before anyone of them did or would! What a true patriot. What a high-powered, morally pure politican!
The rest have a lot to learn from her, but they won't.
|
theboss
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jan-20-05 08:59 PM
Response to Original message |
11. Because you can't turn every battle into D-Day |
|
I agree with what so many have said: the president should pretty much have free reign in choosing his Cabinet. If I were in the Senate, I would be tempted to fight Rice's appointment, but I think I would ultimately keep my powder drive. Especially since it's not going to matter in this case anyway.
Bottom line: Dems control no branch of government. We are probably going to be fighting a rearguard action for the next four years.
Here are my priorities:
1. Keep Scalia-clones off the Bench, particularly at the Supreme Court level. 2. Fight a scorched earth policy on Social Security. Bush can be allowed no victory on this matter. None. Treat it like HillaryCare and gut him like a fish. 3. No more approval for wars. Bush got two wars. He's not allowed anymore.
|
chieftain
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jan-20-05 10:35 PM
Response to Reply #11 |
23. I think you nailed it , but in addition to your 3 points |
|
the Democrats have to vote against the Gonzales nomination . We cannot condone torture . We cannot accept the expansive view of presidential powers that this guy champions . I hope that our other Senators take a lesson from Barbara Boxer and grow a spine .
|
leesa
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jan-20-05 11:38 PM
Response to Reply #11 |
26. "Bush got two wars. He's not allowed any more" Well, maybe if he asks |
|
real nice. Appeasers like yourself make me sick.
|
theboss
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jan-21-05 12:38 AM
Response to Reply #26 |
40. Well, I am sorry to sicken you |
|
But I've decided that your scorched earth policy is best. Democrats must vote no to everything Bush proposes even if it is "Free Kittens for the Elderly." We must turn ourselves into radical obstructionists at every turn and treat every vote as if it were the Cuban Missle Crisis of politics.
I figure the Party will be utterly exhausted, bankrupt, and defeated by May 2006 and there will be 65 Republican Senators in November with that strategy. Good times.
|
AuntiBush
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jan-20-05 11:49 PM
Response to Reply #11 |
|
I'm with you. No wonder you're called "theboss!"
|
DrGonzoLives
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jan-20-05 09:01 PM
Response to Original message |
|
How many fucking more of these threads are we going to have? This is getting tedious.
I guess there are a number of reasons, but I think the chief one is that they are obviously Republicans in Democratic clothing, who are seeking to further alienate the left wing as much as possible. :eyes:
|
bigwillq
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jan-20-05 09:17 PM
Response to Reply #13 |
18. Sorry, I have not posted in a few days and did not search through |
|
the archives to see how many threads were posted on this subject.
I like to hear DUers opinions on certain subjects because many of the DUers here are much smarter than I am.
|
AuntiBush
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jan-20-05 11:45 PM
Response to Reply #13 |
|
I thought it was me w/those thoughts.
|
bemildred
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jan-20-05 09:07 PM
Response to Original message |
15. The Democratic Losership Council doesn't want the confirmation threatened. |
manhattanite
(71 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jan-21-05 12:52 AM
Response to Reply #15 |
42. So Feingold and Obama are with the DLC? |
|
Edited on Fri Jan-21-05 12:52 AM by manhattanite
You can't blame everything on them.
|
bemildred
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jan-21-05 09:52 AM
Response to Reply #42 |
46. That is a non sequitur. |
|
Edited on Fri Jan-21-05 09:52 AM by bemildred
They need not be members of the leadership to go along with the leadership. It's really the default thing to do to go along with the leadership. That's how parties work. What was notable was that a couple high-profile senators chose to object, to break the illusion of consensus.
|
Tierra_y_Libertad
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jan-20-05 09:14 PM
Response to Original message |
17. They're good doggies. They want to get their treats. |
|
Disgusting lack of ethics or decency.
|
Orangepeel
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jan-20-05 10:26 PM
Response to Original message |
20. possibly because they think that a president deserves the cabinet he picks |
|
so she's an incompetent liar. Anybody he puts up will be an incompetent liar. might as well be her :shrug:
sucks for the country, though.
|
autorank
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jan-20-05 10:34 PM
Response to Original message |
22. Can you spell C-H-I-C-K-E-N S-H-I-T There is no excuse. |
|
This is obviously a club. It represents neither the public nor any modicum of common sense. Let's see...she lies, she is incompetent; her lies and incompetence get us attacked and murdered at home and attacked and murdered overseas. Well then, I guess * has a right to the monsters he chooses so I'll vote yes. This is dereliction of duty, violation of the oath, the ultimate example of chicken shit behavior.
|
fryguy
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jan-20-05 11:49 PM
Response to Original message |
35. they're using the jedi mind trick.... |
|
....these are not the droids you're looking for.....you will vote the devil child out of committee.....
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Mon May 06th 2024, 02:45 AM
Response to Original message |