Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

We have some unusual votes in the confirmation for and against Roberts

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
fujiyama Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-29-05 03:26 AM
Original message
We have some unusual votes in the confirmation for and against Roberts
Edited on Thu Sep-29-05 03:28 AM by fujiyama
OK, I find the list very weird...and leads me to suspect the true motivations in some that are voting for and against him.

For example, voting for him are Russ Feingold and Carl Levin. There are a few others that have been pretty steadfast in opposing Bush's legislative agenda that are still voting for him. I'll admit, I don't expect even politicians I generally agree with to vote the way I want all the time (hey, the only way that would work is if I were the politician), but I'm disappoinetd. I would have preferred them to against. I like both of them. They've been pretty consistant in voting against BUsh's legislation (though Feingold has his own 'funky' principles regarding nominees). Still, I feel regarding their general philosophy, Roberts will likely work against much of what they've worked for. Roberts may have charmed these folks, but is likely an ideologue.

Voting against him are some that have voted for quite a few pieces of Bush's legislation and or agenda. Here we have Feinstein, Biden, and to a lesser extent Clinton.

I'll admit, I would have rather had many just vote no. I wasn't expecting a filibuster and I'm not surprprised he's getting some 77 votes or so. Still, how does a 'no' vote hurt? As if that by itself will convince Bush to send a more moderate nominee for O'Conner's replacement.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
bluestateguy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-29-05 03:29 AM
Response to Original message
1. Has Lieberman made an annoucement?
I would predict he's a yes vote, as his presidential ambitions are no more. And in spite of what we are saying around here, there is no evidence that he is in trouble back home.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fujiyama Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-29-05 03:32 AM
Response to Reply #1
3. Voting for
No real surprise here. I agree, he's safe so he has no need to worry. I noticed that most of those that voted against have presidential aspirations. Just checked his website:

"Lieberman Announces Support for Roberts in Senate Floor Statement Today - Sep 27, 2005 More >"
http://lieberman.senate.gov/
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jfern Donating Member (394 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-29-05 04:27 AM
Response to Reply #3
7. Run Lowell, run!
18 years later, you can be vindicated. Run, Lowell Weicker.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nadinbrzezinski Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-29-05 03:32 AM
Response to Original message
2. DiFi she is getting way too much heat from her constituents
;-)

And she is up for reelection next year
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fujiyama Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-29-05 03:34 AM
Response to Reply #2
4. Granted she deserved much of it
Edited on Thu Sep-29-05 03:34 AM by fujiyama
I still can't forgive her (or my own senator Stabenaw) for voting for that Goddamn Bankruptcy "reform" bill.

Granted, I'd still vote for them though if I were voting for DiFi, I'd almost faint from holding my nose.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nadinbrzezinski Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-29-05 03:42 AM
Response to Reply #4
5. I am not voting for her
no way no how... way too many things she has done
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fujiyama Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-29-05 03:46 AM
Response to Reply #5
6. I can't say I blame ya
It's not like she's in a close race anyways.

The GOP will put up some sacrificial lamb that will get killed. Hmmm, it'd be cool to get a challenger in the primaries.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nadinbrzezinski Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-29-05 04:30 AM
Response to Reply #6
8. That is what many of us are hoping
but she is on the ballot... I hope teh green candidate is a good solid candidate, for that person may be surprised.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
corbett Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-29-05 06:00 AM
Response to Original message
9. No One Listening To Grass Roots NGOs On This One
Some of the Democrats who will vote yes, including Bill Nelson of Florida, are up for reelection and want to be sure to grab as many center-leaning Republican votes as possible. Those Dems are voting incorrectly but I can understand the reason. Others who are voting yes don't have that justification and are betraying the party. They ignore the record number of citizen groups, environmental groups and others who have taken a unified stand in record numbers against Roberts. It's pathetic!

www.millionphonemarch.com
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ian David Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-29-05 10:56 AM
Response to Reply #9
11. The National Gay and Lesbian Taskforce has to PRAISE the appointment
Make the righties think they've confirmed the most pro-gay justice EVER!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ian David Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-29-05 10:53 AM
Response to Original message
10. One of those Dems said on Air America that there was a strategy...
It went something like:

1) We want to show that the Democrats will not oppose every presidential nomination.

2) We want to make it clear that we are drawing a line in the sand. We'll go this far, and no further. Your next nomination better be more moderate, or you're going to have a fight on your hands.

I forget who said it, and on what show. I think I'm pretty close to summarizing their position, but those are by no means direct quotes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
etherealtruth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-30-05 07:52 AM
Response to Reply #10
19. That's the way it went in the late 80's ...
Renquist was easily confirmed as chief justice, a few months later came Bork ... we all know what happened to Bork.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SharonRB Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-29-05 11:01 AM
Response to Original message
12. My feeling is that they are picking their battles
They knew he would get confirmed and that he's replacing Rehnquist, so it's a wash. They'll save the fight for the next nominee to replace O'Connor. I know a lot of people have said "I won't vote for Carl when he comes up for re-election," but what are they going to do? Vote for the Republican? I think a lot of people react too quickly on one issue and don't take into account all the good things people like Carl do on a regular basis. This was unwinnable, so give it a rest, folks. Save it for the next one, which won't be far behind.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fujiyama Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-29-05 09:10 PM
Response to Reply #12
14. I think in our case
we have pretty good senators. Levin has been consistantly opposed to most of Bush's agenda and Stabenaw, with the exception of the bankruptcy bill, has also been pretty good.

I agree that people shouldn't hold one or two votes against a candidate. Both of our senators had the forsight to vote against thhe war, and that by itself is worthy of respect.

I also read Levin's response and reasoning on why he voted for him. I still disagree, but it was certainly clear and reasonable.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SharonRB Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-30-05 07:47 AM
Response to Reply #14
18. I agree, fujiyama
It really bugs me when I read people on DU saying they're not going to vote for Carl because he voted for Roberts. I suppose they'll vote for the Repukes. Then they'll complain about them when they win.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
etherealtruth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-30-05 07:57 AM
Response to Reply #14
20. Agreed ...
I wouldn't consider ignoring the rest of Levin's political career and not voting for him because of this vote.

Stabenow's vote for the MBNA bill (aka the bankruptcy bill) enraged me, but I wouldn't vote against her only to see a Candice Miller (or others of her ilk) replace her.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
depakid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-29-05 09:25 PM
Response to Reply #12
16. Don't hold your breath
Edited on Thu Sep-29-05 09:26 PM by depakid
This is the same tired excuse I've heard every single time some issue or another comes up.

The bottom line on it is that as a party, the Dems are cowards. They've denied Bush and the far right nothing that they've asked for. Nothing.

Even with the Republicans imploding, they'll still lose BADLY in 2006- for the simple reason that no one wants to vote for what they consider to be a bunch of stand for nothing weaklings.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bluedog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-29-05 11:04 AM
Response to Original message
13. we don't expect every Democrat to vote our way?
then this party has a major problem....the republicans always vote as a party....it doesn't matter which issue......they show a unity which the press picks up on...and its shown 24/7 a day.the republicans very very very rarely stray from the party.......... and here we are at an advantage point in this term......but we always............have members stray from what is best for this country..what the hell gives here.........

are our reps so weak...in a republican state that they have no spine to REALLY stand up for what they believe?.......I would rather have a rep that says what is what and walk the talk instead of a "what if I don't get releected offical"........I just think both parties esp.the Republicans have gotten out of control..........they are suppose to represent us....not anyone else and when every voter realizes that maybe things will change,.....for me I would love to see.where people get to vote on every god dam f'ing issue.........the will of the people.....thats what this country is based on....not on the will of either party....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SharonRB Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-30-05 07:46 AM
Response to Reply #13
17. I want my representatives in Congress to think for themselves
and vote on their own convictions. I don't want them to be sheeple and vote as a block all the time, just for the sake of appearing united. Isn't that what we're all about -- independence and people thinking for themselves?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zynx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-30-05 08:14 AM
Response to Reply #13
22. The Republican unity voting pattern is *very* historically unusual
Neither party has historically had anything near that sort of lockstep fascist behavior.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
depakid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-29-05 09:16 PM
Response to Original message
15. Feingold voted for Ashcroft too
Hell, he'll find an excuse to vote for just about anyone the far right sent up.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zynx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-30-05 08:13 AM
Response to Reply #15
21. Excuse me, but do you even know anything about Feingold?
Edited on Fri Sep-30-05 08:15 AM by Zynx
He's about the last thing from far right up there.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
depakid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-30-05 08:16 AM
Response to Reply #21
23. Enough to know he doesn't take advice & consent seriously
He can always be counted on to vote for nominees. Check out his record.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zynx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-30-05 12:58 PM
Response to Reply #23
25. He voted against Gonzales for AG.
Feingold has a philosophy to what he does in this regard.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tierra_y_Libertad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-30-05 08:44 AM
Response to Original message
24. They're all playing politics with an eye on their "contributors".
Even my own, usually reliably liberal senator, Patty Murray, sold out.
Too bad, I sent her office a notice that she will get no more support or votes from me or my wife.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sat Jul 12th 2014, 02:08 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC