Thursday, September 22, 2005

Russ Feingold rises above partisanship...

Image hosted by

Special mention to Senator Russ Feingold, who I've previously criticized on this blog for his position on the immediate withdrawal of US troops from Iraq. Today, IMO, he did the right thing and unexpectedly voted yes on the Judiciary Committee in favor of John Roberts' confirmation to the Supreme Court. It's a shame that at a time when political posturing has cost the Bush Administration so dearly, the Democratic Leadership could not also take the initiative to rise above the politics while making an objective assessment of Roberts' nomination... taking into account precedent, past nominees, and paying no mind to the implications for Bush's next nomination to replace Sandra Day O'Connor. Scalia, after all, was a much stauncher ideological Conservative than Roberts, and he received 98 votes in the Senate.

The question those that disagree with me should ask themselves is if Roberts was a liberal, and a nominee by Clinton... If he had served under Carter and espoused views during that time in his twenties about Gay Marriage and perhaps vague references to a controversial subject like Reperations... would we, as Democrats, seriously think a No vote was justifiable under those parallel circumstances? The standard we would expect to be applied to nomination by a Democratic President is exactly the standard we should be applying to John Roberts.

Transcript: Senator Russ Feingold's statement on John Roberts

, ,


Chris said...

I do agree with voting yes on Roberts.

Graham said...

Hey MJ, thanks for commenting. I know, I read your piece and agree with what you said. I feel pretty strongly about Roberts as you can tell.

I think that the partisanship that people are tired of is our responsibility and not just the responsibility of Republicans. That's why I care about things like this quite a bit, because it's our opportunity to define ourselves as something different than what people have grown to expect from their politicians.

Nick said...

Goodbye Presidential aspirations Russ...

Graham said...

Not that he had any worth taking seriously anyway... but, since when did a noble act of bi-partisanship, judging a situation on its merits hinder a Presidential bid. I'm sure resorting to obstructionist tactics for the sake of politics will stand a candidate in better stead come Primary season as a potential Commander in Chief.

Graham said...

Here is a list of the Senators who voted no. I'm disappointed in Bayh:

Akaka, Hawaii
Bayh, Ind.
Biden, Del.
Boxer, Calif.
Cantwell, Wash.
Clinton, N.Y.
Corzine, N.J.
Dayton, Minn.
Durbin, Ill.
Feinstein, Calif.
Harkin, Iowa
Inouye, Hawaii
Kennedy, Mass.
Kerry, Mass.
Lautenberg, N.J.
Mikulski, Md.
Obama, Ill.
Reed, R.I.
Reid, Nev.
Sarbanes, Md.
Schumer, N.Y.
Stabenow, Mich