Vote in Congress

The bill to strip the President of the authority (granted by the PATRIOT act) to appoint prosecutors without consulting Congress, the abuse of which is part of the current scandal in Washington, passed the Senate on a vote of 94 to 2, with four abstentions. Here’s the roll call.

Interestingly, one of the two “Nay” votes came from Chuck Hagel, R-NE. Hagel is very likely to run for the Republican nomination for President, and is considered one of the strongest candidates in that field. Remember this vote for future reference. This scandal is probably going to expand somewhat more, we’ll have some high-profile resignations, and probably a few prosecutions for perjury or obstruction of justice. So later on, if and when Hagel enters the race full-force, this will be a good question to ask him: Why, even after the nature of the abuses of authority became publicly clear, did he vote against restoring to Congress the right to approve the appointments of federal prosecutors?

Unfortunately, the Democratic party — at least, the main machine part of it, that’s pushing so hard for Clinton — seems to be run by spineless fools, and I seriously doubt that they will have either the presence of mind or the courage of their convictions enough to actually remind the American people of the details of a scandal once the media is no longer focused on it. They’ll make it sound like a question about his vote on some minor technical issue, and the larger issue, of subversion of the democratic process by a sitting president and Hagel’s tacit encouragement thereof, will go unnoticed.

On the subject of the machine of the Democratic party, I don’t know how many people have seen this ad that some unknown person made for Obama. (It wasn’t made by Obama’s organization, as far as anyone can tell) It’s based on Apple’s famous “1984” ad:

Apart from being a lovely little hatchet job, it’s been making me realize how strongly I dislike the idea of Clinton running for president. (Which, media furor to the contrary, has nothing to do with Clinton’s gender, or Obama’s race, or whatever the fuck else is the “interesting topic” of the moment) Clinton represents what in my mind is a failed generation of Democratic leadership, one that Bill Clinton succeeded in as a shining exception rather than by any design. I see her as the emblem of a party that’s incapable of defending itself against even idiotic accusations, that allows another party to lie, cheat, and harm the interests of the country without having the brains or the balls to publicly say that this is wrong, and that in general has no clue of which way it would like to lead the country. Nothing that Sen. Clinton has said or done in the 15 years that she’s been in national public life has convinced me that she’s any different.

This isn’t to say that I don’t think she’s a good senator — in fact, I think she has the potential to be an extraordinary one, a powerful force in that house for many decades to come, and a key player in making the United States successful. But I don’t think she’s a good leader for the party, much less for the country as a whole. Her entire generation, AFAICT, has blown it badly, with one side running half-witted demagogues and the other side unable to tell why that’s a bad idea.

I don’t know much about Obama’s politics, yet. His speeches are all well and good, but he hasn’t really gotten down to brass tacks so far. But I do know that he seems to have a clear understanding of the mess, and to not be infected with the mental malaise that seems to permeate the party. If the primary were held today, he would get my vote. For basically the reasons that this ad hints at.

Advertisements
Published in: on March 20, 2007 at 13:55  Comments (10)  
Tags:

10 Comments

  1. If I might amend one of your statements ever so slightly:
    Her entire generation, AFAICT, has blown it badly, with one side running half-witted demagogues and the other side unable to tell clearly say that that is a bad idea.
    My edit is in bold.
    That ad is amazing, by the way.

  2. If I might amend one of your statements ever so slightly:
    Her entire generation, AFAICT, has blown it badly, with one side running half-witted demagogues and the other side unable to tell clearly say that that is a bad idea.
    My edit is in bold.
    That ad is amazing, by the way.

  3. Fair enough.

  4. Fair enough.


  5. Link to roll call that doesn’t require flash.

    Note two of who abstained: Biden and McCain. Bah, loathe them both.


  6. Link to roll call that doesn’t require flash.

    Note two of who abstained: Biden and McCain. Bah, loathe them both.

  7. Biden (D, my home state, please shut up Joe) and McCain (R, scorched earth) are spineless wimps who will do whatever polls tell them is hot; they don’t want to pick the side of the loser, which makes them Losers. Hagel knows that to get the nomination he has to differentiate himself from his fellow Republicans. Whether he gets the nod or not, nobody who understands the vote he cast would ever consider voting for him anyway. I am a vigorous small-L libertarian, and there is nobody running in the G.O.P. that I would look twice at. They’ve sold my civil liberties and given me larger government and a mountain of debt.
    Hillary wants the White House for all the wrong reasons — some of them personal and deeply fucked up — and she wants it so bad that it glows out from between the cracks in her almost-perfect facade.

  8. Biden (D, my home state, please shut up Joe) and McCain (R, scorched earth) are spineless wimps who will do whatever polls tell them is hot; they don’t want to pick the side of the loser, which makes them Losers. Hagel knows that to get the nomination he has to differentiate himself from his fellow Republicans. Whether he gets the nod or not, nobody who understands the vote he cast would ever consider voting for him anyway. I am a vigorous small-L libertarian, and there is nobody running in the G.O.P. that I would look twice at. They’ve sold my civil liberties and given me larger government and a mountain of debt.
    Hillary wants the White House for all the wrong reasons — some of them personal and deeply fucked up — and she wants it so bad that it glows out from between the cracks in her almost-perfect facade.

  9. I have nothing to add, except that I earlier had read an AP article about the 1984/Obama commercial, and found it amusing that the journalist thought that the Obama video’s creator had given the hammer thrower an iPod, when in fact, it was added a few years back by Apple.

  10. I have nothing to add, except that I earlier had read an AP article about the 1984/Obama commercial, and found it amusing that the journalist thought that the Obama video’s creator had given the hammer thrower an iPod, when in fact, it was added a few years back by Apple.


Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: