WHY did all but two Dem senators vote for Rice????

[ailsagirl]

I know this has been asked elsewhere but I have to ask it again. WHY are the Dems backing Rice??

This makes no sense to me-- do they think she's competent?? After the litany of lies and/or screw-ups Barbara Boxer recounted yesterday?? WHY aren't the Dems on BOXER's side??

Since Boxer is my Senator I can't complain (though, yes, there's always Feinstein-- and I plan to email her about it).

I find it bewildering that they support this liar-- or, incompetent woman-- either way, it makes no sense to me. They're part of the problem if they support that woman.

[Jim Sagle]

1. Because the Democrats are yellow.

[ailsagirl]

4. I'm REALLY starting to wonder

How can we CHANGE anything if our elected officials ignore us??

[Name removed]

24. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Jim Sagle]

25. Just the ones in DC. And not all of them. Certainly not Barbara Boxer.

[Vincardog]

2. Call email or write them. Tell them if they support war criminals they are

are war criminals too. We have to resist the occupation at every turn. VIVA

[Us vs Them]

5. Yes, write or call.

I sent a little note to mine full of subtle ultimatum. A vote to confirm Rice is a vote to confirm all the lies and manipulation this administration has come to stand for. I also said the party will be taking steps in the progressive direction - if they are not yet, they will soon find themselves surrounded by candidates who are.

[ailsagirl]

6. I just emailed Boxer and congratulated her; I also emailed

Feinstein and gave her a piece of my mind.

There's just no excuse--

[Untouchedalarm]

12. Deep

Brief and right to the point. You should email to all senators who voted.

[burn the bush]

3. yeah that's right yella

[blondeatlast]

7. (Ducking.) Remember that the vote has been postponed until after the

Coronation of the Monkey King. These was a very media-savvy move on the Dem's part.

They want it to go to the Senate floor, and to get it all on record.

The confirmation hearings are a formality to determine if the candidate is qualified for the job--arguable, but one can make the case for her in that regard.

Whether she is capable of carrying it out is a matter for the entire Senate.

I would have liked to have seen far more opposition, but will reserve judgment for the full Senate vote. In the meantime, I've e-mailed every Democrat as well as Jeffords to ask them to oppose her nomination.

I'm hoping that they've been force-feeding our Democrats calcium lately (for spine).

[ailsagirl]

15. It's not as if there's any question Rice will be appointed

Oh well, I guess I'm grateful for any crumbs the rest of the Democratic Senate (NOT talking about Boxer or Kerry, here) cares to throw my way.

But talk about spineless!!! Maybe every single one of them has skeletons in their closet and they're afraid they'll be brought out?

I can't figure it out.

[Clarkie1]

8. If one of them is your senator, please write to them and ask

[robbedvoter]

9. In the words of Grover Norquist:

"Once the minority of House and Senate are comfortable in their minority status, they will have no problem socializing with the Republicans. Any farmer will tell you that certain animals run around and are unpleasant, but when they've been fixed, then they are happy and sedate. They are contented and cheerful. They don't go around peeing on the furniture and such."

If they were human beings, they'd stand on principle.

[EC]

10. Yeah, I just can't see what they think they

are going to lose for not voting for her, for crying out loud, they all know she's not qualified. Even Biden, basically called her a liar than voted for her. What was that? Could they be anymore hypercritical?

[Ronnie]

11. Because the Senate is an exclusive club.

And they are Senators above everything else. Didn't you know that?

[ailsagirl]

13. I've heard Randi mention it once or twice...

What, they're not politicians???

[Padraig18]

14. They are not 'backing Rice', for fuck's sake!

They are consenting to let Bush* have the person he wants as SOS, something to which he is entitled, unless the nominee is clearly unfit.

[truth2power]

16. But she is unfit. She's a liar, and more. n/t

[Padraig18]

18. Liar? Of course.

If that becomes the criteria for rejecting nominees, be prepared for a LOT of empty Cabinet positions, even when WE regain the WH.

[truth2power]

27. Her lies and support of

the Monkey King took us into an illegal war are responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Iraqis and 1300+ young American men and women.

Not your garden variety liar. Condi is the worst kind of scum.

[ailsagirl]

17. She's pretty incompetent-- isn't that "unfit?" And she's a liar.

She's the best they could do??

Why aren't DECENT HUMAN BEINGS ever considered?? They're always CROOKS!!!!!

[Padraig18]

20. There is not requirement that the POTUS nomiate 'the best'.

He is entitled to have who he wants, with the aforemetioned exception.

[ailsagirl]

22. This pretender just picks those who further his agenda...

And it's an ugly, corrupt agenda. Great-- the scum of the earth is still in charge... what next do they have in store for us??

[Padraig18]

23. And OUR Presidents didn't do the same?

:eyes:

[ailsagirl]

26. I would say it depends on the agenda.

Bush is corrupt and evil and he's wreaking havoc just about everywhere. Except for the corporations. The corporations are getting fatter and greedier and we're getting crushed.

I don't much care for that agenda.

[kerrygoddess]

19. Democrats Could Delay Rice Confirmation in Full Floor Debate

It appears that Kerry and Boxer are working their magic with Senate leaders on the confirmation of Condoleezza Rice. NBC News via MSNBC is reporting that “Democrats planned to delay her widely expected confirmation by the full Senate.”

http://www.lightupthedarkness.org/blog/default.asp?view=plink&id=250

[ailsagirl]

21. I'm glad of that-- I'd love to see her sweat some bullets

[JI7]

28. it's not as if their votes would have changed the outcome

and even if it did , it's unlikely the replacement would have been any better.

[robbedvoter]

30. None of their votes from now on will change dick. So why not

make a statement? What are they saving their impotence for?

[OneBlueSky]

29. because Democrats, like Republicans, are, for the most part . . .

bought, paid for, and own the t-shirt . . . they each have their favorite corporate sponsor(s) -- Hillary has the banking and credit card industries, Lieberman the insurance industry, etc. -- who support their campaigns, throw fund raising receptions for them, and fully expect that their issues will receive the appropriate support in return . . . and, in the great American tradition of "you scratch my back, I'll scratch yours," they all support each others sponsors as well . . . net result vis-a-vis we, the people: "Let them eat Krispy Kremes" . . .

it's a sad, sad situation, and so completely contrary to professed American ideals . . . like all good politicians, Democrats are expert at saying one thing and doing another . . . and then convincing their constituents that it all makes sense . . . and their constituents, being supremely ignorant about most anything outside their own individual spheres of interest (SUVs, soccer practice, NFL football, and the like), believe them because they just don't know any better . . . sad, sad, sad . . .

[kerrygoddess]

31. Kerry, Kennedy to vote against Rice

Kerry, Kennedy to vote against Rice
By Associated Press
Wednesday, January 19, 2005

WASHINGTON - Sen. John Kerry , D-Mass., whose condemnation of the Bush administration's Iraq policies was a cornerstone of his presidential campaign, was one of two senators to vote against the nomination of Condoleezza Rice as secretary of state Wednesday.

Kerry said Rice, who has served as Bush's national security adviser, was a principal architect and defender of Iraq policies that alienated U.S. allies and failed to make the country safer.

``Regrettably, I did not see in Dr. Rice's testimony any acknowledgment of the need to change course or of a new vision for America's role in the world,'' said Kerry. ``On Iraq, on North Korea, on Iran, to name just a few of the most critical challenges, it seems to be more of the same.''

Sen. Edward M. Kennedy , D-Mass., also plans to vote against Rice's nomination.

His spokeswoman, Stephanie Cutter, said Rice ``had a major role in developing the irresponsible and reckless Iraq policy, and its been a catastrophic failure, a continuing quagmire. She shouldn't be promoted to Secretary of State.''

http://news.bostonherald.com/election2004/view.bg?articleid=64331