Thursday, September 29, 2005

Roberts Confirmed...2008 On Too Many Minds?

Coming to the realization that the Republican Party, suffering from the indiscretion of it's leadership, doesn't really need any cheap shots taken by the likes of me right now, I decided to look at my own party for a moment. The Senate vote came down on the confirmation of Chief Justice John Roberts today and I was well, surprised. I watched several of the hearings and I watched several of my fellow Democrats rake him over the coals, yet I still can't for the life of me figure out the 22 "no" votes.

All 22 of the "no" votes came from the Democratic Party. This is what I've come to conclude. Too many have their sights set on the 2008 presidential race. This means one of two things, they all hope to run or they all hope to better the Democratic candidates choices by not being too bi-partisan. I pray they aren't all hoping to run, the Democrats can't survive another 9-way primary. They can't even survive another primary that includes John Kerry. So here's my breakdown on the 22 "no" voters and whether or not they have their sights set on the White House:

Akaka (D-Hawaii)-- lack of document disclosure on Roberts' part, no presidential aspirations
Bayh (D- Indiana)-- future presidential aspirations, maybe not 2008, but an odd press release and mixed signals before his vote
Biden (D- Delaware)-- duh. 2008.
Boxer (D-California)-- radical loyalty to the party, hopefully nothing about 2008
Cantwell (D-Washington)--disclosure, environmental policies, party loyalty
Clinton (D-New York)-- Mrs. Clinton has all but announced.
Corzine (D-New Jersey)-- someone probably paid him to vote this way
Dayton (D- Minnesota)-- his vote was really about Roberts and lack of disclosure, not a future presidential candidate as far as I can tell
Durbin (D-Illinois)-- why doesn't Dick run for president?
Feinstein (D-California)--same reason as Boxer, maybe some bitterness still over 2004, Schiavo, and who knows what else
Harkin (D- Iowa)--an honest vote regarding civil rights
Inouye (D-Hawaii)--lack of disclosure
Kennedy (D-Mass.)-- I'm convinced Teddy's goal in life is to defeat a Supreme Court nominee, he's not running for President, I think he learned his lesson in 1980.
Kerry (D-Mass.)-- bitterness?? ya think?
Lautenberg (D- New Jersey)-- something fishy is going on in NJ since the governor resigned
Mikulski (D-Maryland)--disclosure issue
Obama (D-Illinois)-- the rising star of the Democratic Party doesn't want a "yes" vote on his resume just yet, 2008? Probably more like 2012.
Reed (D-Rhode Island)--minority protection issue
Reid (D-Nevada)-- the biggest mistake the Democrats have made is choosing Reid to be Minority Leader and I'm not just saying that because I love Tom Daschle.
Sarbanes (D-Maryland)--lack of disclosure, civil rights, and party vote
Schumer (D-New York)--truly a partisan vote, maybe he thinks Mrs. Clinton will want him as her VP, he's certainly not running, but you've got to respect the zealot.
Stabenow (D-Michigan)--constitutional rights; questions unanswered

This will stir up some controversy, but if I were a senator or if any of those senators were taking my advice, I'd say follow the example of seniority (i.e. Byrd). AND...if Jim Jeffords (I-Vermont, and avid hater of the Republican Party) can vote for Roberts I think he might just be an okay guy. When it comes down to it there was going to have to be a conservative Chief Justice, so I would ask my fellow Democrats, would you rather it be Scalia or Thomas? Didn't think so.


Nick Speth said...

Bayh: Mixed signals is an understatement. I NEVER know what to think of Evan Bayh.

Biden: I guess he's hoping people have forgotten his ripping off stump speeches.

Corzine/Lautenburg: You don't like NJ do you?

Kerry: You didn't mention that he's considering another run. Wishful thinking on your part?

I'd like to get my hands on "Inside the Bubble," the documentary on the Kedwards Campaign which, if the NY Daily News is right, isn't truly flattering.

Reports the News's Lloyd Grove:

A press release claims the movie - which won't be shown publicly until Thursday - "turns a harsh but deeply revealing mirror on the campaign ... a disorganized, contentious, self-absorbed team that thought they could win by 'not making mistakes,' and keeping their candidate in the public eye without clarifying a position on anything."

Self absorbed... Kerry? No.

Tara A. Rowe said...

For a first time presidential-election voter I'll be the first to admit due to my interests and nerdiness (if that's a word) it was great to have a Democratic candidate with the initials JFK running out of Boston, but I'll also be the first to admit the Kerry campaign was weak.

I guess I omitted the fact that he's more than likely to run (hell, he thinks he's the frontrunner) just because I think the Democrats are dead in the water if they nominate him.

How could you tell I don't like New Jersey?

And Biden and Bayh. I've been quite disgusted with Biden (almost as disgusted as I've been with Reid) since the death of Rehnquist. I couldn't vote for the guy. And Bayh runs in circles with his statements, I've learned to take his comments at face value and nothing more.

Tara A. Rowe said...

Did I mention that Leahy voted yes to Roberts? If anyone has anything against the Bush administration and the Republican Party at large, it's that man. He too must have realized Roberts is a pretty good choice. I'd vote with Dodd, Dorgan, Leahy, and Byrd any day.

Nick Speth said...

Congrats btw to your Braves for their 14th division title in a row.

Tara A. Rowe said...

Hey, thanks Nick. The problem is the Braves are really good at getting those division titles, but they always choke soon after. Keep your fingers crossed!

Tom said...

I linked this post (and your latest post on The West Wing) from the Carnival of the Campaigns.