They can't win, so they're going to throw a tantrum - Jay Maynard

> Recent entries
> Calendar view
> Friends page
> User info
> Jay's web page

Thursday, 20 January 2005


Previous Entry Share Next Entry
0752 - They can't win, so they're going to throw a tantrum

Senators Robert Byrd (D-WV) and Barbara Boxer (D-CA) know they can't derail Condoleezza Rice's confirmation as Secretary of State. Boxer was just one of 2 votes against her approval by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

So, what are they going to do? They're going to mount a mini-filibuster when the Senate opens for business today. Their aim is to delay the vote past 7 PM, in the hope that Republican Senators will depart for their inaugural social obligations, and thus delay the final vote until next week.

This is amazingly childish of them. They're not going to change anyone's mind. All they're going to do is make the Senate look silly. Of course, Boxer's already shown herself for what she is, prompting Tom Clancy to say "to have an elected official question one's integrity is rather like having a street whore question one's virginity".

I should expect nothing more from the Left, but hope springs eternal.

current mood: [mood icon] angry

(22 comments | Leave a comment)

Comments:


From:chgowiz
Date: - 0000
(Link)
IMO, the vast majority of elected officials throw tantrums and act stupidly, regardless of party affiliation. One only has to go back to the years of the Clinton Administration, or to when the Democratic Party held majority, to see Republican foolishness. I'm very cynical of both sides of the house and actually expect this sort of behavior. What do you expect?

I'd like to see some English Parliament style fistfights on CSPAN from the House/Senate floor, actually. ;)
[User Picture]
From:fitz99x
Date: - 0000
(Link)
Jay, Condi Rice was a big part of the lie (or if you wish to be generous, the huge lapse of judgement and deligence) to America that has cost the lives 1300+ troops. The more important issue is that the other 16 memembers are just rolling over not that two are doing their job. I mean heck, if CBS was running the show, she'd be fired by now for her fake memos and poor performance.
[User Picture]
From:iransofaraway
Date: - 0000
(Link)
Let's just conveniently forget that many other country's intelligence bureaus agreed with our "lie", as well as major players in the U.S. congress. But, whatever.

And nevermind the fact that if we had not taken action, and Saddam attacked us (directly or indirectly [ie, funded]) later on, we would be chastized for not doing something about it.

I guess we lose either way..
[User Picture]
From:fitz99x
Date: - 0000
(Link)
By all credible reports Saddam was only capable of attacking his own people and every other bit of Agent Mulder style conspiracy is just excuse making and buck passing. I belive we diserve better.
[User Picture]
From:phanatic
Date: - 0000
(Link)
I belive we diserve better.

You also apparently believe the Iraqi people deserved to go on living with a jackboot pressing down on their necks.
[User Picture]
From:unspeakablevorn
Date: - 0000
(Link)
Oh, here we go again.

I personally don't give a flying wahooni about the Iraqi people. I feel the jackboot hovering over my neck.

Vorn
[User Picture]
From:phanatic
Date: - 0000
(Link)
I personally don't give a flying wahooni about the Iraqi people.

Well, at least your honesty is refreshing.
[User Picture]
From:unspeakablevorn
Date: - 0000
(Link)
And there you go again.

Why do you insist that their freedom is more important than mine?

Vorn
[User Picture]
From:jmaynard
Date: - 0000
(Link)
Since when are the two mutually exclusive?
[User Picture]
From:unspeakablevorn
Date: - 0000
(Link)
Under this administration they feel like it. They're all about promoting freedom around the world, but I'm sitting here and my way of life is getting attacked.

Vorn
[User Picture]
From:phanatic
Date: - 0000
(Link)
What way of life is being attacked that wasn't being attacked by Kerry?

When it comes to assaults on the civil liberties of Americans, I saw very little difference between the two party's respective candidates.
[User Picture]
From:phanatic
Date: - 0000
(Link)
I wasn't aware we could only pick one.
[User Picture]
From:phanatic
Date: - 0000
(Link)
was a big part of the lie

Oh, yes, the lie. Gee, why don't we go and look at the resolution that authorized the war, and see what it was all those Congressmen were voting 'aye' for.

Whereas Iraq both poses a continuing threat to the national security of the United States and international peace and security in the Persian Gulf region and remains in material and unacceptable breach of its international obligations by, among other things, continuing to possess and develop a significant chemical and biological weapons capability, actively seeking a nuclear weapons capability, and supporting and harboring terrorist organizations;


We were apparently wrong about the CBW pursuits, but at the time, so was everyone else. This wasn't a lie, it was the best information we had at the time, and it was a belief shared by people like Al Gore, Bill Clinton, and Kerry.

Now, we haven't found the stuff. But we know he had it. If he had destroyed it, he could have easily documented that and fulfilled the terms of the cease-fire agreement, but he did not do so, and chose to instead violate the terms of not only that agreement, but many other binding UN resolutions over a period of more than a decade, by obfuscation and acting to thwart the inspectors.

The CIA was less-than-competent on this one, and I'm all for the purge of that organization that's currently ongoing. But we're still left with the question of "Just where did all this stuff *go*?", and that's a question that continued inaction on our part certainly wasn't going to solve.


As for supporting and harboring terrorist organizations, that's well-documented. Hussein not only funded Palestinian suicide bombers, he sheltered such well-known international terrorists as Abu Nidal and others.

Whereas Iraq persists in violating resolutions of the United Nations Security Council by continuing to engage in brutal repression of its civilian population thereby threatening international peace and security in the region, by refusing to release, repatriate, or account for non-Iraqi citizens wrongfully detained by Iraq, including an American serviceman, and by failing to return property wrongfully seized by Iraq from Kuwait;

Which parts of that were a lie? Surely not the repression of his own populace.

Whereas the current Iraqi regime has demonstrated its capability and willingness to use weapons of mass destruction against other nations and its own people;

Also a matter of historical record. He used these weapons in places like Halabja, against his own people, and against Iran. Not a lie.

Whereas the current Iraqi regime has demonstrated its continuing hostility toward, and willingness to attack, the United States, including by attempting in 1993 to assassinate former President Bush and by firing on many thousands of occasions on United States and Coalition Armed Forces engaged in enforcing the resolutions of the United Nations Security Council;

Also a matter of historical record, and not a lie.

Whereas members of al Qaida, an organization bearing responsibility for attacks on the United States, its citizens, and interests, including the attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, are known to be in Iraq;

Kind of a weak catch-all, as AQ's massively distributed architecture's pretty much a sure guarantee that there are members in just about every country in the middle east.

Whereas Iraq continues to aid and harbor other international terrorist organizations, including organizations that threaten the lives and safety of American citizens...


Nope, no lie there.

That's not the Bush administration saying all that. It's Congress.

she'd be fired by now for her fake memos and poor performance.

You mean, like the three producers who were asked to resign, and have refused to do so?

[User Picture]
From:fitz99x
Date: - 0000
(Link)
[User Picture]
From:korgmeister
Date: - 0000
(Link)
Guys, check your satire detectors!
[User Picture]
From:howardtayler
Date: - 0000
(Link)
This Cox & Forkum comic nicely lampoons Kerry and Boxer.

--Howard
[User Picture]
From:unspeakablevorn
Date: - 0000
(Link)
Nor should you expect anything more from the Right. After all, you said yourself just last week that you wish the democrats would stop ignoring the plank in their own eye (that is to say, the 10,000 unverifiable registrations in Wisconsin, which in itself does not consitute fraud. What evidence is there that all these people voted democrat?). Why should you be entitled to ignore the plank in yours?

Vorn
[User Picture]
From:shelbystripes
Date: - 0000
(Link)
Jay, if this were two right-wing senators, say, blocking the nomination of Janet Reno as the new Secretary of State after Kerry was elected, you'd be spinning the same situation the exact opposite way, talking about them as "the few who truly stand up for their beliefs" and making an "Alamo-like last stand against tyranny" and all sorts of bizarre stuff.

Really.

You're not objecting to their actions so much as their ideology; or, more specifically, you're objecting to their actions because of the ideology tied to it. If the same actions were toward a cause you believed in, you'd be all behind it.

The difference between "standing up for your beliefs" and "being a sore loser" is simply a matter of which side you believe is in the right.
[User Picture]
From:ladyegreen
Date: - 0000
(Link)
I should expect nothing more from the Left, but hope springs eternal.

Frowns, it's got to stop. You expect nothing more from the (make sure to use a cap) Left? What on earth does that mean? It means nothing. Stick Right (again, gotta cap that first letter)in its place and the same statement is being made by millions of Americans in reverse.

How on earth did we, as a country, get here and when do we get to get off the blasted train already. You make a post regarding childishness and then end it with childishness. And it's not just you. It's all over the internet, all over the TV, the radio, and in our newspapers.

People are worried in America about the prospects of a civil war. Maybe they should be worried when everywhere you look people have turned against an ambigous Right or an ambigous Left. You've removed the human equation from the other party, you've removed what you might be able to empathize with or agree with. The faceless, evil Left. Once you make a group faceless it's so much easier to accuse, convict and punish any and all that you deem fits into those parameters.

You're using the understood ALL and it is certainly a dangerous thing. Martin Luther King day just passed, do you think his wife and son remember what it was like to Colored? (with the big C) I bet they do, back when what could you expect from those Colored people sitting at the white man's booth, doin nothing but causing trouble. Do you have any Jewish friends with family lost during the holocaust? Maybe you can ask them what the Nazi's expected of them Jews (with the big J, of course) because it sure was easy to kill them by the thousands once they were made a faceless ambigous enemy.

Support your party, your beliefs, your SUV, identify yourself with a great big R if it makes you happy. But you're a smart man, too smart to be lumping everything into Left = bad, childish, evil, enviroweenies versus Right = shiny, happy, always right. People on both sides have got to stop doing this because the more we do it the more hate, discontent and maliciousness will spread and grow not against specific persons or situations but against entire groups themselves.

At the point that you are comfortable making a statement that generalizes an entire group as being beneath you. When you can sigh as say, well, I *had* hoped for better but you know how *blank* are. That is the point where you need to take a long hard look in the mirror and figure out what went wrong with you. I have a very dear friend who constantly blames everything on Christians because at some point he got just a bit too comfortable too. Now when I talk to him (and he's not the only one, much as I wish that were not so)he has to figure out how to exclude me from his chosen group of people to despise. Because you know, he didn't mean me, he meant all those other Christians. Maybe you don't mean me either, maybe you mean all those other people on the Left...you know...the great big faceless so called majority because it's easier to stick it to them then it is to be direct and precise. Nebulous hate and elitism easier to manage then dealing with diversity and the possiblity that there are merits and demerits to anything a person or group can be.

Of course, I shouldn't be berating you because I have, in the past, made the same mistake and lack of judgement on my own journal. Of course mine was a lapse of clarity, because I always mean some people on the Right and I try to catch myself before posting to make sure I made that clear. I didn't always earlier journal entries, much to my regret.

L.



[User Picture]
From:phanatic
Date: - 0000
(Link)
You're using the understood ALL and it is certainly a dangerous thing. Martin Luther King day just passed, do you think his wife and son remember what it was like to Colored? (with the big C) I bet they do, back when what could you expect from those Colored people sitting at the white man's booth, doin nothing but causing trouble. Do you have any Jewish friends with family lost during the holocaust? Maybe you can ask them what the Nazi's expected of them Jews (with the big J, of course) because it sure was easy to kill them by the thousands once they were made a faceless ambigous enemy.

I can't believe you're making this analogy.

People don't choose to be Jewish, or black, or gay.

People do choose to register as Democrats.

You and me and everybody else are going to be judged in part by the company you keep. If this distresses you, choose better friends.
[User Picture]
From:unspeakablevorn
Date: - 0000
(Link)
There is a flaw in your logic: I once almost chose to be Jewish.

When is it wrong to oppose policies you disagree with? When does that opposition make you less than human?

You and me and everybody else are going to be judged in part by the company you keep. If this distresses you, choose better friends.

Okay. The company you keep feels that despite its ineffectiveness, sex education should be limited to "abstinence only". The company you keep feels that gays should not have the same rights as everybody else. The company you keep is willing to mislead the public into thinking that there are crises where there aren't any, and blow sunshine out its ass to hide crises that it created. The company you keep assumes not only that its opposition is incorrect, but evil and stupid.

I don't know about you, but man, I wouldn't want to be in that company.

Vorn
[User Picture]
From:ladyegreen
Date: - 0000
(Link)
Interestingly enough someone else covered most of what I would have responded with.

Point in fact though: I'm not a registered Democrat.

I like my friends just fine because I am capable of seeing and building on what is valuable in someone while coping with differences. If I weren't me and my best friend of over fifteen years wouldn't be on speaking terms as she is a registered Republican.

L.

> go to top
LiveJournal.com