Filibuster a Supreme Court nominee who has placed his opposition to Roe v. Wade in writing, holds a radically broad concept of Presidential power at a time when that exact issue may be presenting a Constitutional crisis (or would, if we had an opposition party), and was evasive in his confirmation hearings? Nah: the (pro-life) Senate Minority Leader calls it a "conscience vote."
Filibuster the unconstitutionally overbroad Patriot Act that includes provisions which invade Americans' civil liberties without making them safer and makes the President's powers even broader? Nah: leave Feingold hanging out there with only a couple buddies for support.
Filibuster an immigration bill that's much more on conservatives' radar than liberals'? Hey, sure!
The man's loyalties and priorities both are misplaced. Boxer for Minority Leader.
BACK TO VICHYDEMS HOME
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
I don't know that Reid tracks the DLC agenda (I'm not saying he doesn't, I'm honestly saying that I don't know). I'd love to hear more about what others think about him -- sometimes I'm the only one who's questioning his leadership.
And no, I don't automatically classify all DLCers as Vichy. I don't really have a problem with centrist, or even conservative, Democrats -- so long as they are good team players (for instance, abiding my party discipline in close, important votes), then I think their own constituents have the right to whoever they choose, even if their positions are more conservative than mine.
What I DO have a problem with in the DLC itself constantly trying to monopolize the party, as I discussed here and in the links that post contains. That really ticks me off, because while I believe voters have the right to elect conservative representatives, they also have the right to elect progressive ones, and the DLC's leadership both forecloses that possibility and keeps losing elections.
Thoughts?
Post a Comment