Veto? I don't believe it. Oh, wait, yes I do.
Anyone surprised by Smirky's veto of the stem cell bill take two steps back and repeat Poli Sci 101. You see, Smirky ain't running for office anymore, so he can do anything he damn well wants to do. Give the German Chancellor the most inappropriate backrub in diplomatic history at a G8 Conference meeting during a war in the middle east? No problem. Veto a bill designed to stimulate and foster research into an area that could potentially cure any number of afflictions currently without cures? Why not? It's not as if he has ever cared what the vast majority of the populace supports before.
Those not paying attention might take heart that this bill actually passed the House and Senate; gee, if it weren't for that evil Smirky, everything would be just fine, right? My Congressperson and Senators are ok, they've just been thwarted by Smirky and the gang in the Executive branch! I'll vote for them anytime!
Of course, every single Republican on the Hill knew before the first caucus meeting that Smirky was going to veto anything that came out of Congress regarding stem cells, so any vote before then would end up irrelevant. Irrelevant, that is, except for showing constituents back home exactly what the reps wanted them to know about themselves. Heck, it's probable that the majority whips didn't even have to make any calls for solidarity on this vote, because the fix was in. The only vote that really matters is the one after the veto, and we all know how that one will end up; heck, this vote wasn't veto-proof.
The real news was that some of the Senate Republicans in serious re-election battles voted against the bill. What were they thinking, especially those from mainly (or trending) Democratic states? Seeing who these guys are, though, it is obvious that they really were voting their beliefs: Allen, Burns, DeWine, Ensign, Kyl, Santorum (who probably knows his days are numbered anyway), and Talent are among the most batshit insane members of the Senate. That they were mostly hung out to dry by 20 or so of their more politically attuned colleagues who crossed the aisle is the only possible surprise here. (The other 30 Senators who voted "no" can conceivably be thought of as either representing their constituents faithfully--shudder--or know that by the time they come up for re-election this will have been forgotten by about 99.9% of the people in their states.)
So, did we actually see, for the first time in human memory, a straw poll of what Republicans might possibly not be 100% in favor of destroying our country? Maybe. The more likely lesson is that those Republicans who voted in favor of this bill are smarter (or simply more politically astute) than those 7 listed above, but that isn't saying too much, is it? Which is just about what this vote was worth, after all: not much.
Those not paying attention might take heart that this bill actually passed the House and Senate; gee, if it weren't for that evil Smirky, everything would be just fine, right? My Congressperson and Senators are ok, they've just been thwarted by Smirky and the gang in the Executive branch! I'll vote for them anytime!
Of course, every single Republican on the Hill knew before the first caucus meeting that Smirky was going to veto anything that came out of Congress regarding stem cells, so any vote before then would end up irrelevant. Irrelevant, that is, except for showing constituents back home exactly what the reps wanted them to know about themselves. Heck, it's probable that the majority whips didn't even have to make any calls for solidarity on this vote, because the fix was in. The only vote that really matters is the one after the veto, and we all know how that one will end up; heck, this vote wasn't veto-proof.
The real news was that some of the Senate Republicans in serious re-election battles voted against the bill. What were they thinking, especially those from mainly (or trending) Democratic states? Seeing who these guys are, though, it is obvious that they really were voting their beliefs: Allen, Burns, DeWine, Ensign, Kyl, Santorum (who probably knows his days are numbered anyway), and Talent are among the most batshit insane members of the Senate. That they were mostly hung out to dry by 20 or so of their more politically attuned colleagues who crossed the aisle is the only possible surprise here. (The other 30 Senators who voted "no" can conceivably be thought of as either representing their constituents faithfully--shudder--or know that by the time they come up for re-election this will have been forgotten by about 99.9% of the people in their states.)
So, did we actually see, for the first time in human memory, a straw poll of what Republicans might possibly not be 100% in favor of destroying our country? Maybe. The more likely lesson is that those Republicans who voted in favor of this bill are smarter (or simply more politically astute) than those 7 listed above, but that isn't saying too much, is it? Which is just about what this vote was worth, after all: not much.
posted by bryduck at 9:49 AM
8 Comments:
Dear Mr. Surly,
You are the only person I know who might be able to help me. I am confused on how the energy crisis of a couple of years ago was all Davis's fault, but this one isn't Ah-nold's fault. I'm really confused. Can you explain how it is different, or if it is? Honestly, I don't get why things are different for Republicans than they are for the rest of world.
Thank you, The Towel Thrower
Oh, that's an easy one. Oh, wait, you already got it; things are different for Republicans. You see, they are the chosen people. If they do something, it is by definition good and just, unless it isn't, in which case, it's somebody else's fault. I don't know why you would possibly not understand that . . .
Dear Mr. Surly,
Oh, I understand, I just tend to keep running into the same brick wall over and over again. I do that with a lot of things. You'd think I would learn the obvious.
I have another question. Now that the United States is literally feeling like it's turning into Hell, temperature-wise and all, was Gore the Messiah and Florida screwed it up? Do you think Gore will rise again?
I think I've seen a note on this before, but I can't remember. The brick wall is giving me a headache.
Thank you, The Towel Thrower
Gore was definitely the US's Messiah, but maybe only in comparison to the Anti-Christ who stole the election from him. I certainly hope he comes back; see my post here.
Dear Mr. Surly,
Thank you for the link, but it didn't work. However, since I am pretty good at finding things (so they say), I tracked it down.
I haven't seen Gore's movie, but I will. This time of year is hard on those who wear many hats at work. Although obviously, I make time run around the internet.
I would very much like to see Gore run again. I can't really decide on a running mate, though.
I do have one thing to say about your statement on Gore. You said - We need a President who understands more than single syllable words.
This is true, however, I think a good start would be for having a President that can speak more than single syllable words.
Although, I suppose, if he can't understand them, how can he say them. Oh well. :/
Thank you, The Towel Thrower
Hmm, you were right. That link didn't work at all. maybe this one will.
Well, it is certainly the case that Al can speak multisyllabically as well. I think Gore/Edwards would be a nifty pairing, because I think Edwards possesses a similar intelligence and even more charm than Gore does. I'd love to be able to suggest someone a bit more to the left of Al to run with him, but no one beyond Gore has enough credibility at this point, imho.
True liberal leftists/progressives really need to step up to the political plate all across the country to give real choice back to the voters. Running to the middle only helps if there's an actual middle, instead of the rightward creeping middle that HRC and Joe Lieberman occupy currently. See my post here to see what I'm talking about.
Bush sucks. Out.
Post a Comment
<< Home