Why ?

[kentuck]

Why would so many Democrats vote for an incompetent liar like Condi Rice ? Are they afraid of that Bush and the Repubs may do to them just what they did to Tom Daschle? Are they operating out of cowardice?

Or is it that they do not realize the seriousness of the present political reality? They think that politics is just like it was fifteen or twenty years ago when they first came to Washington? They pretend to be statesmen - taking the middle ground - hoping to be rewarded at the polls and in public opinion polls? They don't understand that Washington and politics have changed?

[Hippo_Tron]

1. Because some dems want to uphold Senatorial Courtesy

Russ Feingold voted for Condi because he BELIEVES in Senatorial Courtesy. Likewise he voted NAY on the Patriot Act because he believes in civil liberties. I admire him for both votes.

[kentuck]

2. I think "Senatorial courtesies" are out of touch ......

with the changes that have taken place and are taking place each and every day. But I think you are right that that is the reason most of them voted for Condi Rice. I think they are misguided.

[Hippo_Tron]

3. Senatorial Courtesy doesn't have to be out of touch

By sinking to the level of the Repukes we will have essentially given up on a very important principle. The principle that the elected President gets to pick who he wants to run his government. By giving up on senatorial courtesy ourselves we let it die. By having the integrity to preserve it, there is still hope that one day it won't be out of touch and misguided.

[kentuck]

4. That's not "senatorial courtesy"...

that's stupidity. There is no principle that the president gets to pick who he wants to run his government. They must have some standards of decency or the Senate has an obligation to vote them down. Liars are not decent.

[Kerrytravelers]

5. I thnk senatorial courtesey goes out the window when you have a

teamthat's leading the death march across the globe. But, we're rolled over to these warmongering fascists for so long now, I guess we're out of practice on how to be Democrats.

[Hippo_Tron]

6. Yes there is, there is a principal that cabinet nominees...

Are not supposed to face tough challenges in the Senate. The President is supposed to get who he wants in HIS cabinet. This is a special principal that is supposed to be extended by the opposition party to cabinet appointees and cabinet appointees only. Judges and other appointments don't recieve this.

Obviously there is some discretion, because even Russ (who casted a key deciding YEA vote for Ashcroft in the judiciary committee and on the floor four years ago) voted NAY on letting Gonzales out of committee.

I understand that you as well as others feel that Condi falls into that same category as Gonzales and should not get that courtesy. While I agree that she certainly has done some extrordinarilly aweful things and that personally I might not vote to confirm her myself, I still respect Russ and many other dem senators for using their personal judgement in this case.

Are there SOME that sold us out and voted for her because they want to be re-elected or they are hoping for a presidential bid? Sure, there are a few. But I don't think that, that few includes people like Dan Inouye, Pat Leahy, Byron Dorgan, Jay Rockefeller, etc.

[kentuck]

7. I will agree that that is the way it has always been done....

But I don't think it is wise to follow the status quo at this time in our history. Just my opinion.

[Hippo_Tron]

8. I look at it as a "cost and effect" ratio

If 45 democrats were to vote NAY on rice as opposed to 13 what effect would it actually have had? Sure it would get a little more media coverage, but we all know that the mainstream media is going to champion Jesus Bush Christ no matter what happens. If we had chosen to fillibuster, Bush would've withdrawn rice, and put in a puppet with no record who would run the State Department in the same way. There's no real practical purpose to this fillibuster. We all know that she lied but half of America believes that she was just simply mis-informed, hence half of the country voted for *.

Gonzales is a bit of a different fish. The torture incident was horrible and only fascist assholes like Inofhe were okay with it. And unlike Rice's lies, the Abu Ghreib incident had pictures and media coverage. It's an issue that we could VERY effectively capitalize on by taking a firm stance and it is an issue that Kerry could have very effectively capitalized on during the election by talking about it more.

We'll see what happens. I'm just trying to point out that there were several logical reasons for Democrats to vote YEA on rice and thus I am not demonizing them for their votes.

[DFLforever]

10. I agree with you.

Many of these senators are living in the past. Senatorial courtesy - what a precious anachronism from the lost Republic.

[Clarkie1]

9. And exactly where does this "principal" appear in the constitution? n/t

[Hippo_Tron]

11. The fillibuster isn't in the constitution either

Neither is the precedent that senate rules require 60 votes to change. I suppose that it's okay that the Republicans do away with those so that Bush can put three Scalia clones on the SCOTUS.

[zmdem]

13. It does not make an appearance in the constitution

but is implied in the seperation of powers that forms the heart of the constitution. Cabinet officers are part of the executive branch, hence they are subservient to the president. They serve at his pleasure. The advise and consent provision is provided to prevent cronyism and clearly unqualified officers from attaining office.

It is plainly nonsensical to suppose that a president should have to suffer subordinates in the executive branch on the whim of the legislative branch. Just as Bush should not be required to have Dennis K. as his Secretary of Defense, neither should a Democratic president be required to have John Ashcroft as his Attorney General.

Ultimately the president is responsible for the executive branch, not congress.

[Hippo_Tron]

14. LMAO Dennis K as Bush's Secretary of Defense

What a sight that would be.

[LibertyorDeath]

12. Senatorial Courtesy WTF are you talking about? America

as we know it is being dismantled before our very eyes bit by bit.

An AG who condones Torture

I'll say that again the nominee for the Highest Law Officer in the land the Attorney General of the USA Condones Torture.
The CIA has been turned into a yes man outfit.
The Pentagon (Rumsfeld) is consolidating power without oversite.
Bush yes men have been appointed to every important Department.
and go fuckyourself Cheney is threatening to attack Iran.

and now this abomination, the appointment for Secretary of State
Bush's number one sycophantic Liar.

There is no time for Courtesy of any kind They have declared War against

WE THE PEOPLE.