Sen. Murray Says She Will Support Roberts' Bid

[rsmith6621]

"WASHINGTON, D.C. - Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash., said Wednesday she will vote for Chief Justice-nominee John Roberts, describing her vote as one of hope over fear.

"My vote tonight is a vote of hope - hope that despite our differences we can unite around the common good," Murray said in a speech on the Senate floor."

http://komotv.com/stories/39481.htm

"hope that despite our differences we can unite around the common good,"

What Common Good!!!!!!!!

Can You Say YOUR FIRED Sen Murray????
Sen Murray moaned and groaned over Senate Democrats that didnt back her emergency 1.9 billion$ Veterens care bill that was defeted...

Another spineless Dem.

[rpannier]

1. Face facts

He's gonna be confirmed and kicking out every Dem who votes for Roberts will NOT help our party.

[joanne]

2. Let the Patty Murray bashing begin

[philosophie_en_rose]

4. Been there. Done that.

I'm disappointed, but it's not as if she's ever been progressive.

[RC]

9. Why not vote against him then?

At least they will be on record as being against Roberts when he decides against abortion rights, against evolution, against womens rights, to dismantles the various safety net programs...

[rpannier]

19. Maybe she's decided to save her no vote for the next nominee

We did a poor job of getting our message out as to why we oppose Roberts. Trading Roberts for Rehnquist is not something I'll lose sleep over. But saying "You'll vote against Murray because she voted for Roberts" is short sighted. We lose her we could get a Slade Gordon-type from the Republican Party. We got scrubbo because some people in the Democratic Party voted for Nader. Let's look at the broader picture.

[RC]

26. I am looking at the broader picture

Every one of the bu$h nominees should have been voted down by the Dem's. If nothing else that would send the message that we do not have a one party rubber-stamp system. As it is now, we usually can't tell which team the players are on without a roster because too many of the Dem's vote as a block with the repugs. The score card reads as if there are less than a dozen on the defensive side. Where is the loyal opposition? Aren't they, the Dem's, almost half of Congress? You can't tell by their voting records or their actions.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

29. She wouldn't lose her next vote if she voted no on Roberts.

As much as I've liked and supported Patty, she's sold us out. She, like Cantwell, has lost my vote because of her vote.

[Jim Sagle]

3. What a goddamn bozo.

[Art_from_Ark]

5. Common good?

What kind of common good can be achieved by confirming a person to the top spot on the highest court in the land who has a shady past and refuses to answer even basic questions about his background?

Congratulations, Senator Murray-- You have just purchased a PIG in a POKE.

Now all you have to do is put a little lipstick on him, and he'll be the most gorgeous pig ever.

[madokie]

8. I will add myself to your observation

[WA98296]

6. No one can stand on principle? I'm one pissed constituent.

[PowerToThePeople]

7. I Llive in WA, she's gonna hear it from me! n/t

[M_Demo_M]

10. I live in Washington State too

and I called her office today to urge her vote against Roberts confirmation.

I'm making another call tomorrow to let her know what I think of her vote.

[spuddonna]

24. Yeah, she's already gotten at least 1 call and a dozen letters from me...

She's going to get some more, plus a little note to let her know that the money I had planned on putting in her campaign fund is going to Maria...

This is ridiculous - common good, my ASS! JMJ...

[Pobeka]

11. And I hope Bush is a compassionate conservative.

What lesson has Ms. Murray failed to learn, over and over and over and over and over again?

This is why dems are viewed as weak, and can't defend our country. They won't even defend their values in congress, and show strength of principle. Why in the hell should we trust them to defend us when it comes to real violence.

It's like they want to become even more irrelevant.

[spindrifter]

12. It's a Wash.-Wash

Cantwell is supposed to reject Roberts. Now P.M. says she's for Roberts. What is the difference? Cantwell is up for election and has plenty of people ticked off due to her early position on Iraq. Highly vulnerable if the Repukes mount any well-financed opposition, she is giving on the Roberts issue. Murray on the other hand does not face the immediate re-election crisis. She wants to maximize her strength within the Senate by demonstrating that she'll go along to get along on this initial appointment, but will hold them to the test if they play funny on the second one.

[spindrifter]

13. It's a Wash.-Wash

Cantwell is supposed to reject Roberts. Now P.M. says she's for Roberts. What is the difference? Cantwell is up for election and has plenty of people ticked off due to her early position on Iraq. Highly vulnerable if the Repukes mount any well-financed opposition, she is giving on the Roberts issue. Murray on the other hand does not face the immediate re-election crisis. She wants to maximize her strength within the Senate by demonstrating that she'll go along to get along on this initial appointment, but will hold them to the test if they play funny on the second one.

[never_get_over_it]

14. Picture this

situation is reversed and Al Gore nominated someone to the Chief Justice position and Dems had control of the Senate and the confirmation was a sure thing - I'd be willing to bet that EVERY repunk would vote NO. The Dems have got to stop waiting to pick a battle or bide their time and vote as a block simply on principle

Tell me that every repunk was actually against an independent investigation of the response to Katrina - well if they were for or against it everyone of them voted NO - except the repunk Senator from LA who didn't vote....how often do the repunks in the Senate and in the House vote in a block - we have got to be an opposition party.

Even if we lose what the hell is wrong with sending a message.

[Pobeka]

16. They *are* sending a message, that dems are weak.

See my post #11. Everytime they don't support the liberal base, it makes them look like ineffectual representatives of their own constituents, and then why would you re-elect someone like that to defend the USA if it came to arms, when they won't even show strength against the GOP?

[MildyRules]

27. The Repukes

didn't do that on RBG. She passed almost unanimously.

[spindrifter]

15. It's a Wash.-Wash

Cantwell is supposed to reject Roberts. Now P.M. says she's for Roberts. What is the difference? Cantwell is up for election and has plenty of people ticked off due to her early position on Iraq. Highly vulnerable if the Repukes mount any well-financed opposition, she is giving on the Roberts issue. Murray on the other hand does not face the immediate re-election crisis. She wants to maximize her strength within the Senate by demonstrating that she'll go along to get along on this initial appointment, but will hold them to the test if they play funny on the second one.

[spindrifter]

17. It's a Wash.Wash

Cantwell is supposed to vote against Roberts. She is up for re-election and appears highly vulnerable, as many who originally supported her have closed the wallets after her ill-considered support for the Iraq war. Murray, on the other hand, is not focusing on saving her seat. Instead, she's looking at the politics of going along with Roberts so she can blow out all stops when B*sh nominates for the second USSC position. She should reassess that position, as there is enough anger among the citizens about the administration that she would be able to vote no on Roberts and have plenty of clout to oppose the undesireable second nomination.

[delhurgo]

18. I think this is a smart move.

You want a decent amount of democrats voting for Roberts so theres credibility in opposing the next nominee if need be. You still want some voting against, but not too many to make it seem that democrats are just opposing just for the sake of opposing.

This should put Democrats and moderate Republicans in a good position to force a more moderate nominee for the next pick.

[DELUSIONAL]

20. Bitch --

I'm sorry I donated to her campaign and that I voted for her.

Never again. I will never again vote for a DINO.

I will abstain from voting --

she is a bitch -- or rather a half human typical GOPig.

I'm going to contact her and ask her to stop calling herself a democrat.

[Rainscents]

22. I am calling her office too tomorrow and she is going to hear from me!

I am sick and tired of her and Cantwell selling out the Dem's! I will NOT vote for her nor Cantwell! Someone here in Washington Dem's better come up grassroot who is going to challange Cantwell next year!

[DELUSIONAL]

25. I won't vote for Cantwell either -- same reasons --

she has sold us out.


I really shouldn't call Cantwell or Murray -- bitches -- it insults dogs.

[burrowowl]

21. To quote the Bard:

Hope springs eternal in the heart of a fool.

[FreedomAngel82]

23. Goodbye all my rights I love

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

28. My senator. Always liked her. She just lost my vote.

I am now stuck with two Democratic senators that I won't vote for. And, one congressman (D) who is a "maybe".

It's getting real hard to be a Democrat as they play politics with peoples lives and the constitution.

Too bad about Patty though. I was under the delusion that she was that rare politician who had priniciples.

[LynneSin]

30. We knew we were going to get stuck with one neo-con nut job

I'm hoping and praying that the reason for such a cake walk for Roberts is because they are gearing up for the fight of their life to ensure that a moderate is put into position for O'Conner's empty seat.

Roberts is replacing Rehnquist which is like replacing battery acid with Drano.

I'd be upset, but it's the next nomination that will determine how I truly feel about some of these democrats. Patty Murray gets major support from Women's groups like Emily's List and could lose their support if she betrays them too many time.