« Why Even Bother Having Debates? | Home | Very Strange Bedfellows »
Democrats Cave In To Bush (Again)
By Joshua Rosenstock | November 6, 2007
You’d think a lame duck President with a 33% approval rating would meet more hostile opposition from the other side of the aisle, yet the Democrats continue to behave as if they are more than happy to oblige nearly all of Bush’s congressional requests. This is not exactly a shocking development as the Democrats have spent the better part of the last ten months acting as if having a majority in both Houses of Congress is just something that sounds nice on paper yet lacks coercive power to influence change in the federal government. Nothing could be further from the truth as we saw from the Gingrich Revolution in 1995.
The President needs another $50 billion for his failed foreign policy experiments? Sure! The President wants to deny health insurance to poor children? Get a job, slackers!
Need a new attorney general because your last one was so incompetent and corrupt, he attempted to get an unconstitutional act (wireless surveillance) approved by a man (John Ashcroft) in his hospital sick bed? Why the hell not!
Aren’t the Democrats supposed to be party that values education (or are they just in bed with the teachers unions for no reason at all)? Then, you’d think after watching this administration in action for almost seven years they would have learned something by now. Senators Schumer and Feinstein submitted “yesâ€? votes in the Senate Judiciary Committee, which ensures that the nomination of Michael Mukasey will make its way to the Senate floor and that he will be confirmed.
Schumer’s reasoning?
“Should we reject Judge Mukasey, President Bush has said he would install an acting, caretaker attorney general who could serve for the rest of his term without the advice and consent of the Senate.”
This means that, for procedural reasons, Schumer would accept anyone the President nominates for this post. His test outlined above fails to recognize that the Democrats have the authority and votes to oppose and reject the President’s nominations (and maybe, no attorney general for the next year would be better than having one that doesn’t know what constitutes waterboarding).
“In particular, I believe that the cruel and inhumane technique of waterboarding is not only repugnant but also illegal under current laws and conventions.”
Actions speak louder than words Senator.
Topics: Alberto Gonzales, Civil Liberties, Congress, Democrats, Ethics, Foreign Policy, George Bush, Newt Gingrich |