|
Democrats’ vacuous actions
Yesterday, Democrats sank to new lows in the conduct of the venerable U.S.
Senate. Minority Leader Harry Reid showed new levels of partisan unilateral
action by moving for a closed session. His actions were immediately followed
up by a fund-raising letter from Democrat National Committee Chairman Howard
Dean.
Senate Majority Bill Frist sent the following e-mail after the Democrat’s
actions:
Leave it to the Democrats to find old ways to sink to new lows ...
Today ... for the first time in more than 25 years ... Harry Reid - backed
by a loyal following of obstructionist Democrats - invoked an obscure rule
under which the Senate chamber can be ordered into closed session.
No vote is required.
One moment, we were talking about finally acting to get our deficit under
control.
The next: closed doors. Zipped lips. No C-Span.
Everything secret.
Why did he do it - and why does it matter?
This was, at best, a political temper tantrum.
But more likely ... a feeble attempt to give purpose to a party with no
agenda.
A tactic of the weak ... a tactic of a party with no convictions, no
principles, no ideas.
Look ... it's no secret that Washington has been tense lately over numerous
political issues, but this can be healthy.
To debate is democratic ... a sign of progress ... a means to a resolution.
What was done today is anything but ...
It was an affront to the Senate; it was an affront to the American people;
and it was an affront to the principles of democracy.
This political stunt, in truth ... reinforced the difference between US and
THEM.
We - Republicans - were elected by the American people to MOVE AMERICA
FORWARD.
The Democrats are content just standing in our way.
So ...
When Harry Reid and his colleagues are done pouting behind closed doors, my
door will be OPEN.
Open to talk about how we're going to secure our borders; open to talk about
filling the vacancy on the Supreme Court; open to talking about ending
wasteful Washington spending and restoring fiscal discipline to our
government.
Open to DOING THE JOB THE AMERICAN PEOPLE ELECTED US TO DO.
Today's actions remind m e of an old proverb:
"The man who strikes first admits that his ideas have given out."
Bill Frist, M.D.
Bayh vs. Hagel?
Iowa’s top political guru David Yepsen of the
Des Moines Register thinks that the two to watch in Iowa are Sen. Evan
Bayh of Indiana and Sen. Chuck Hagel of Nebraska, because they are both
centrists and from the Midwest.
Yepsen writes:
Horserace journalism: For observers handicapping the presidential
campaign in Iowa, it is worth keeping an eye on Hagel in the Republican
party, just as it's worth keeping tabs on Indiana Sen. Evan Bayh on the
Democratic side. Historically, Iowa's caucus-goers have shown a preference
for presidential candidates from the Midwest.
Both understand how to campaign in rural America. Both are relatively
unknown and will have low expectations going into the race. With a lot of
time and some money, each could do well by beating those expectations on
caucus night.
Both low-key Midwesterners also fall more toward the middle of the spectrum
inside their respective parties. That's an important position, because in
Iowa, the most extreme candidates in each party's presidential field almost
never finish first.
At a time when many Americans are sick of partisanship and want problems
solved, experienced, well-grounded, centrists like Hagel and Bayh could have
appeal in the Hawkeye State.
Who’s on first
Will New Hampshire remain the first primary state in the nation? Will Iowa
remain the first caucus state in the nation? It's up for discussion and
possible change for both Republicans and Democrats, with a December 1st
meeting for the commission to consider revising the primary calendar.
The
Manchester Union Leader offers insight into the 2008 and 2012
presidential cycle planning:
As both parties wrestle with whether and how to reform their primary
processes, the primacy of the Granite State's primary is open to debate.
Party leaders from other states are angling to move ahead of New Hampshire,
but what the final calendar will look like remains unclear.
"No deals have been made and no decisions have been finalized," Rep. David
Price of North Carolina, who co-chairs the Democratic National Committee's
Commission on Presidential Nomination Timing and Scheduling yesterday told a
forum on the Presidential nominating process.
"This is a topic that is going to take a lot of discussion if we're actually
going to make any changes," said David Norcross, chairman of the Republican
National Committee's Committee on the Rules. "There appears to be no
appetite in the [Republican] party to change."
Gingrich wants change
Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich’s recent visit to Iowa brought a call for
Republicans to change.
"I think Republicans have a real challenge. We’re either going to be the
party of change or we’re going to be the party of defeat," Gingrich said.
He warned Republicans against being labeled the party of ineptitiude.
"There’s no way you can look at New Orleans and not think we have to have
profound change in the government operates," Gingrich said.
Chuck Hagel, moderate
Sen. Chuck Hagel (Neb.-R) made a journey to Ames, Iowa to check the
presidential waters. His visit offered a look at how a candidate running in
the center might look. He criticized President Bush’s No Child Left Behind
Act. He called for troops to get out of Iraq after December elections. He
pushed his Immigration legislation that would put more responsibility on
employers and would provide provisions that would allow current illegal
aliens to gain legal status.
However, nothing showed his moderate positioning more than his statement,
"The extremes of both parties have control of those parties to the detriment
of both parties . . . the American people want to see responsible
governance. I think that will be a factor in the next election."
Abramoff investigation
Sen. John McCain is holding hearings into lobbyist Jack Abramoff, who was a
former aide to Majority Leader Tom DeLay. McCain is calling Steven Griles, a
former lobbyist who resigned last December as deputy interior secretary, and
leaders of a Louisiana tribe that paid lobbyist Abramoff and an associate
$32 million to testify Wednesday before the Senate Indian Affairs Committee.
Judge removed from DeLay's case
Convincing proof was presented Tuesday by Tom DeLay's lawyers which resulted
in the removal of Texas state district judge Bob Perkins from overseeing
DeLay's case. The San Antonio Express News reports: [LINK]
In their motion to have the judge recused, DeLay's attorneys pointed to some
30 contributions totaling more than $5,000 that Perkins made to Democratic
causes between 2000 and 2005.
They cited, in particular, five contributions he made to the liberal group
MoveOn.org as well as to the state and national Democratic parties after he
began presiding over the cases of DeLay's associates, John Colyandro and Jim
Ellis, who were indicted in September 2004.
The causes Perkins supported were directly opposed to DeLay and often raised
money for their organizations by using DeLay as a "whipping boy," defense
lawyers argued.
MoveOn.org: half a million sigs
MoveOn.org has already garnered 350,000 signatures against Judge Samuel
Alito and are now going for half a million:
Dear MoveOn member,
On Monday, President Bush buckled under pressure from the radical right and
nominated the extreme right wing Judge Samuel Alito. MoveOn members leapt
into action, blowing away our original goal and gathering more than 350,000
signatures in just over 24 hours—a new MoveOn record.
So today we're aiming to boost the total to half a million signatures, and
do it by tomorrow. If we can get there, we'll run an ad in Roll Call,
the newspaper that Congress reads, to show them the new total.
|
