posted
Dems blamed for Bolton delay I'll be the first to say that I don't fully understand the workings of these sub-committees, but since it is a Republican dominated (10-8)committee, chaired by a Republican with the authority to call a vote...doesn't it seem a bit hasty to automatically blame this on the Democrats?
Posts: 1480 | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Last I heard, Sen. Vonovich was a Republican. He won in Ohio by a much larger margin than Bush did.
I think this quote from the article (courtesy of Condoleezza Rice) underscores the problem:
quote: "The president deserves to have the person at the United Nations that he thinks best to carry out this job."
That isn't how our government works, at all. The Senate confirmation process exists for a multitude of good reasons. If Bush made good nominations for cabinet positions, they would pass quickly, like the 200 or so federal judges that have been confirmed in the past four years.
Posts: 24 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
That's the new Republican fighting tactic, if the Democrats try to block their legislation, just call them obstructionists, regardless of what their actual idealogical and practical reasons for opposing said legislation.
What, Democrats think drilling in ANWR is a bad idea? It might hurt the environment, not solve the energy crisis, and be a huge windfall for oil companies? Pfft, obstructionists!
What? Democrats won't pass the new energy legislation because it gives billions to coal, and oil companies and does little to address the issue of renewable energy, fuel inefficiency, and actually protects gasoline refiners from lawsuits suing for cleanup and damage funds as a result of MTBE use? Shameful! Obstructionists! LIBERALS!
What? Bolton said the UN doesn't exist, said it was useless, and has basically no respect for it, and they DON'T want him to be our representative to the UN? Obstructionists!
What? Democrats want Tom DeLay investigated on corruption charges for three seperate possible instances where corruption might be involved? Obstructionists! Slanderers!
To me, that just makes the Republicans look weak. They can't defend their own positions so they just throw out obstructionism like that solves everything. If they can't substantively defend their position, they must not have anything to back it up with, which makes me trust the Democrats that much more.
On the other hand, it makes me all that much more pissed off at the Democrats for not being able to combat these idiots. If the best defense they can come up with is shouting gibberish at us and trying to play off the ignorant feelings of the public, I think it is ridiculous that Democrats can't beat that.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Wow! That is such a well-reasoned, fair-minded rebuke of the Republican party, I think they should change their evil, stupid ways!
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I am not 100% familiar with the entire aprroval process, but I do know that a tie in the committee means that he is not approved. When the vote is expected to go straight party line, which it was, and it doesn't, and it didn't, it seems a bit rash to blame it on those that would have lost if it did.
Sen. Vonovich is clearly the only person to 'blame' for the delay of approval, and I think there was a legitamte reason. The Dems raised some questions regarding Bolton's history and Sen. Vonovich simply said that these questions should be looked into before they blindly approve him, think of him as Henry Fonda. It could be argued that the Dems raised the issues only to delay or block Bolton's approval as the information that they are basing their questions on was only revealed about two days before the vote, but whether it is an actual delay tactic or not I think it would be irresponsible to approve the post without looking into the questions raised.
Posts: 38 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
For the record, while I in fact agree with many of Bolton's opinions regarding the UN, by no means do I think it is inappropriate for the Democrats to delay his approval for Ambassador to the UN. Clearly someone with such an outspoken, negative opinion regarding that body should be double-checked before becoming its ambassador.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
It wasn't well-reasoned, because Democrats routinely make similar childish and overblown accusations about Republicans concerning the environment, big business, etc. They both engage in the same behavior using different words.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Rakeesh, That has nothing to do with whether or not what Lyr said was well-reasoned. And I'm constantly amazed that people who purport to be adults actually proffer "Well, they do it too." as a way of dismissing criticism of their side and expect to be taken seriously. What is it about politics that makes behavior we wouldn't accept from a 10 year old seem okay?
posted
Big Business? Alright, the left does lob a lot of rhetoric about big business at the right, but it has nothing to do with legislation.
As far as the left and environmental legislation, I almost always hear them naming specifics when they talk about their problems with the republican's plan. I can hardly agree with you on things being equal, seeing as how we're dealing with Republican sponsored legislation, your comparison doesn't hold up.
When Democrats say they are holding it up because of specific problems they have with the legislation, the Republicans call that obstructionist. Rhetoric is a part of political life in America, sad, but true. But ignoring a legitimate complaint just because they are too lazy to defend themselves? Or because they perhaps cannot defend themselves? Or they outright blame Democrats for something that is the Republican's fault, like moving Bolton's confirmation out of committee.
They are the party in power, and the are abusing it like crazy. And yes, that is a well reasoned judgement and rebuke on the Republican party. And no, you can't make me sound unreasonable just becuase some Democrats may have done that in the past (post your argument for that, and we'll see), that still doesn't diminish the truth in what I'm saying.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I wasn't dismissing the criticism, I was expressing disdain for it because such behavior is done by both sides. If you'd read further, you'd have noticed that I actually said I agree with Democratic hedging on Bolton's nomination.
quote:Big Business? Alright, the left does lob a lot of rhetoric about big business at the right, but it has nothing to do with legislation.
Nothing to do with legislation? Everytime an issue comes before Congress that involves the environment, corporations, bankruptcy, or natural resources, invariably the criticism is thrown that the GOP is in the pocket of Big Business, because their legilsation helps Big Business more than the Democrat proposal does so.
quote:And no, you can't make me sound unreasonable just becuase some Democrats may have done that in the past (post your argument for that, and we'll see), that still doesn't diminish the truth in what I'm saying.
Are you serious? Some Democrats 'may' have done that in the past?
Republicans throw insults regardless of what Democrats say they are doing, and Democrats do the same thing. The only difference is, you agree with the DNC reasoning, and so to you, their reasoning is sound.
I often agree with their reasoning-as I did here-but I am not so partisan as to pretend that they aren't the same.
Edit: For the record, I should have been more clear: I was taking most issue with your characterization of Republicans as sleazy and stupid-you can't claim it wasn't there-than with Republican behavior on Bolton.
posted
Where in the world would you get the idea that a majority vote couldn't win passage through a committee, TMedina?
Admittedly, for 200years before the present Republican majority, there was such a thing as Senatorial courtesy. If a nominee was looked upon with disfavor by one of the Senators representing the state in which the nominee was a citizen, the nomination was automaticly tabled without appearance before the relevant committee, and the nomination was quietly withdrawn by the President. However, that pseudo"veto" was limited to the specific Senators of the nominee's homestate under the presumption that homestate Senators would have better knowlege of the homestate nominee's qualifications/acceptability than outsiders.
But even that small courtesy has been withdrawn in favor of neo"conservative" belligerence in all matters. Especially belligerence against RepublicanParty members who refuse to goosestep with the majority.
posted
Yes, but the facts seem to support Democrats on those. Republicans get twice as much money from corporations that Democrats do. In the same way that whenever Republicans make claims that Democrats are in the pocket of unions I tend to not disagree, as unions tend to heavily fund and favor Democrats. So don't paint me as some die hard liberal that ignores my party's faults just to attack the opposition party.
So explain to me how Democrats are flinging any type of slander when they say that many republicans are in the pocket of big busines, when Republicans get more money from big business lobbies, and pass more pro business legislation than anyone else. The new energy bill that is being greased along by the Republicans gives huge multi billion dollar payouts to coal and oil businesses. The numbers are real. The Republican votes are real. So how are Democrats making that up?
I think you are angry that the Democrats may actually have a point with some of what they say. I'm not blind to what the Democrats say and do, and yes, I happen to agree with them about the environment, Bolton, and Tom DeLay, but that doesn't mean I turn a blind eye to other issues.
I happen to disagree with the Democratic fillibustering of judge nominees, but on the other hand I disagree with DeLay and the Republicans calling them activist judges that make things up as they go along, just because the judges happen to rule a way they don't like.
Edit to add: Yes, I was calling the Republicans stupid, not so much sleazy though. I think they are taking the country in a bad direction, and it pisses me off, so I'm blowing off some steam at their expense. I don't however, mean to offend you personally.
quote:So explain to me how Democrats are flinging any type of slander when they say that many republicans are in the pocket of big busines, when Republicans get more money from big business lobbies, and pass more pro business legislation than anyone else. The new energy bill that is being greased along by the Republicans gives huge multi billion dollar payouts to coal and oil businesses. The numbers are real. The Republican votes are real. So how are Democrats making that up?
By that logic, it is equally fair to say that the Democratic party is in the pockets of Unions, celebrities, and environmental organizations, now isn't it?
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:I think you are angry that the Democrats may actually have a point with some of what they say. I'm not blind to what the Democrats say and do, and yes, I happen to agree with them about the environment, Bolton, and Tom DeLay, but that doesn't mean I turn a blind eye to other issues.
I'm not angry with the Democrats, neither because of their stances or their methods of criticism. I agree with many of their stances, and I expect stupid methods of criticism from both parties. I am a registered Independant.
I'm irritated with people who think their party is substantially better or more mature than their opposition, that's all. Or at least, people who believe and say that their party would behave differently were their party in power.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
That argument is made by millions of Republicans every day. And I have a hard time disputing it. Except to say that celebrities don't really have an agenda per se, other than the environment, except possibly FCC restrictions. There's no pro-celebrity legislation in congress.
And I happen to agree with the environmental lobby on a majority of things. But yes, I do believe that Unions and the Environmental lobbies hold powerful sway within the democratic party. At least I can admit it.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Good for you. Many Republicans are also willing to admit that their party is to some degree at least controlled by Big Business interests and religious right interests.
But that doesn't equal 'in the pocket of...' unless the same can be said of Democrats and their interests.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote: I'm irritated with people who think their party is substantially better or more mature than their opposition, that's all. Or at least, people who believe and say that their party would behave differently were their party in power.
I see your point. As politicians no, I don't think the Democrats are any better than the Republicans, nor would they be if they were in control. Issue oriented, I think they are better yes, but then, I agree with them on more issues, so that's just logical.
I can honestly say that I am angry with Republicans though. Their tactics frustrate me yes, but that isn't the majority of my anger. A lot of it is directed at their smug superiroity, which grates heavily on me. And I'm angry that they have the nerve to call the Democrats tax and spend liberals, and all the other common anti liberal rhetoric, when they continue to drive our financial state down the drain. All of which I believe are valid complaints.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
Rabid Reps--Those Dems just want to obstruct anything we do.
Rabid Dems--Those Reps take any excuse to call us names like Obstructionists so they don't have to admit to mistakes.
Rabid Reps--Yeah? Well you guys do it to.
Rabid Dems--Yeah? Well you guys do it to.
We don't even bother with denial, but jump straight to the attack.
Here are some facts.
Bolton has a reputation of enjoying his power too much and respecting those below him to little. Such behavior is bond to get back to you sooner or later. One underling he messed with happened to later become a staff member of one of the Republican Senators on this committee. The underling wants to keep it quiet in the name of party unity, but the Senator is willing to put his staff and his country over the interests of his party. I congratulate him.
The Dems have said several times they don't think they can win this one, and want to use their influence on the upcoming judge wars. So yes, blaming the Dems for this delay is a Rep tactic. Its been a Dem tactic before.
LAYING BLAME DOES ONLY ONE THING. IT FREES YOU FROM THE RESPONSIBILITY OF SOLVING THE PROBLEM!!!
Bolton has problems. Instead of facing those problems the power dealers in Washington would rather blame the Dems.
Posts: 11895 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
