RiverStone
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Sep-27-07 03:30 PM
Original message |
I contacted my Senator and asked why she voted for Kyle-Lieberman |
|
Senator Patty Murray - Seattle Office.
The Staffer gave a well rehearsed response (slightly paraphrased with my memory) as follows: Senator Murray voted for it after language was taking out that could give President Bush any chance to justify military action.
Staffer went on...
Senator Murray has consistently been a supporter of diplomatic sanctions against Iran and that is all this amendment was; it states that we have concerns about Iran and we wanted to express the sense of the Senate about them.
I shared with this staffer that Patty Murray is assuming that Shrub knows how to read English; and that the BushCo regime will extrapolate the language to justify ANY DAMN WAR they want. Giving Shrub any further authority to sanction Iran is provocative and just took us one step closer to war.
I added that there is extreme disappointment in DEMS on The Hill that seemingly have sold out their principles which brought them into power in the first place, and in particular using the anti-war rhetoric that got them elected in 2006.
Staffer responded...
Thank you for your comments, I will pass them along to Sen, Murray.
|
txaslftist
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Sep-27-07 03:41 PM
Response to Original message |
1. Because she wanted to keep her seat. |
|
This was an AIPAC make or break vote.
You don't vote no on those.
|
uppityperson
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Sep-27-07 10:09 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
2. She is in no danger of losing her seat, except from this. |
|
Usually she votes the way I would, this one surprised me. She is in no danger. Cantwell, our other senator, is in danger and voted no on Lieberman/Kyl, all of which is odd.
|
txaslftist
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Sep-28-07 09:43 AM
Response to Reply #2 |
8. She's looking ahead. She knows that AIPAC has the ability |
|
to kill her presidential bid if she doesn't play by the rules.
|
lligrd
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Sep-27-07 11:28 PM
Response to Original message |
3. In Other Words, She Voted For A Stupid, Meaningless |
|
piece of trash. We don't need any legislation passed to support Israel. We support them when they are right and don't when they are wrong. Why would we do any differently?
|
txaslftist
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Sep-28-07 09:45 AM
Response to Reply #3 |
9. No. We support them right or wrong. |
|
That's our current history, and includes both Democrats and Republicans. There is no divide on this issue in Washington. Both parties agree that Israel can do no wrong.
|
burrowowl
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Sep-27-07 11:51 PM
Response to Original message |
|
said thank you for not supporting Kyl-Lieberman!
|
jillan
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Sep-28-07 12:29 AM
Response to Original message |
5. I should do that - my Senator IS Kyl |
Zandor
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Sep-28-07 08:27 AM
Response to Original message |
6. So what the resolution actually said didn't matter |
|
just your extrapolations?
|
Freddie Stubbs
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Sep-28-07 08:32 AM
Response to Reply #6 |
7. With that reasoning, Congress should not pass ANY legislation |
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Tue May 07th 2024, 03:34 PM
Response to Original message |