Meta-Blog

SEARCH QandO

Email:
Jon Henke
Bruce "McQ" McQuain
Dale Franks
Bryan Pick
Billy Hollis
Lance Paddock
MichaelW

BLOGROLL QandO

 
 
Recent Posts
The Ayers Resurrection Tour
Special Friends Get Special Breaks
One Hour
The Hope and Change Express - stalled in the slow lane
Michael Steele New RNC Chairman
Things that make you go "hmmmm"...
Oh yeah, that "rule of law" thing ...
Putting Dollar Signs in Front Of The AGW Hoax
Moving toward a 60 vote majority?
Do As I Say ....
 
 
QandO Newsroom

Newsroom Home Page

US News

US National News
Politics
Business
Science
Technology
Health
Entertainment
Sports
Opinion/Editorial

International News

Top World New
Iraq News
Mideast Conflict

Blogging

Blogpulse Daily Highlights
Daypop Top 40 Links

Regional

Regional News

Publications

News Publications

 
Kerry’s attempt to marginalize himself with the center
Posted by: McQ on Thursday, January 26, 2006

Apparently John Kerry is driven to raise his visibility in anticipation, one assumes, of again boring us to death with another futile attempt at the White House.

OK, yes, that was snarky, but you know what, I'm really tired of this guy:
Sen. John Kerry will attempt a filibuster to block the nomination of Judge Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court, CNN has learned.

Kerry, in Davos, Switzerland, to attend the World Economic Forum, was marshaling support in phone calls during the day, he told CNN.

Kerry said he told a group of Democratic senators Wednesday, and urged that they join him. Kerry said he has the support of fellow Massachusetts Sen. Edward Kennedy.
Wow, there's a pair to draw to, huh? A smart guy might figure out after announcing his plan to a group of Democratic senators that when the only taker is Teddy Kennedy it might not be that great an idea.
Some senior Democrats told CNN they are worried that the move could backfire.
You don't say? But it sure would fire up the base at DU and Kos and the boys wouldn't it? Might put Kerry back in the good graces of the extremists there who thought he was too far to the right of Dr. Dean the last time around. Might give his sagging prospects a boost. On the bright side for Republicans, it would also divert attention from the Nancy and Harry "Culture of Corruption" show as well.

And, given everything I've read, it will fail miserably.

I love calculating politicians. Especially those who don't yet understand that their time on the stage is over and haven't the good grace to get the hell off of it.

This isn't about Alito. This is about Kerry '08. But then, for him, what isn't?
 
TrackBacks
Return to Main Blog Page
 
 

Previous Comments to this Post 

Comments
As someone who held my nose and voted for him last time, I couldn’t agree with you more.
 
Written By: Steven Donegal
URL: http://
As someone who voted for a Republican for president for the first time in his life because John Kerry was such a freaking idiot last time, I couldn’t agree with you more.
 
Written By: Dave Schuler
URL: http://www.theglitteringeye.com
Kerry, because Massachusetts is finally running out of Kennedys.
 
Written By: looker
URL: http://
Kerry will be in favor of running again in ’08 - before he’s against it.
 
Written By: Billy Hollis
URL: http://
All politicians are annoying. But to suggest that Kerry somehow stands out is ridiculous.

On the other hand, after watching some of our wesael-in-chief today at the press conference, I think I can safely say there is no one more annoying than Bush. Forget his policies. It’s his demeanor. He is such a poor, sniveling excuse for a president, it would be hard to think of someone more ill-suited for the job. That little weasly laugh of his is the worst. The worst. It just grates on the ears. His stammering makes him sound retarded and senile. He also has that whiney delivery, especially he raises his voice at the end of a point is he is desparately trying to make. ("It’s hard work" "We’ve been working hard.") Then there is his fake, macho walk. And have you ever just watched him stand - he has kind of this hunched over look that makes it seem like he can’t stand to be in his own skin.

3 more years? Gawd.
This isn’t about Alito. This is about Kerry ’08. But then, for him, what isn’t?
If someone says something isn’t about X, it’s about X.

I can’t figure you Q and O guys out. Alito is a true libertarian’s worst nightmare. His governing philosophy seems to be that the government always wins. He seems to support unchecked executive power. One would think true libertarians would be demanding a fillibuster.

Or maybe there aren’t any true libertarians around here.
 
Written By: mkultra
URL: http://
Or maybe there aren’t any true libertarians around here
I always get a chuckle when MK tries to define "true libertarian".
 
Written By: JWG
URL: http://
Gee, you think Kerry read the Times editorial calling for a filibuster?

I’d have actually respected the play a bit had it not been so painfully obvious which tail was wagging which dog (or horse’s ass in this case)
 
Written By: shark
URL: http://
I can’t figure you Q and O guys out. Alito is a true libertarian’s worst nightmare. His governing philosophy seems to be that the government always wins. He seems to support unchecked executive power. One would think true libertarians would be demanding a fillibuster.


Seems to me that libertarians also support the idea that the president (WINNER OF ELECTION) has the perrogative to get his nominee seated on the bench as long as they’re qualified (which is why there was no love for Miers).

As for the rest of your screed.......aw, poor baby. Widdle Mkultra doesn’t wike the way big bad Bush talks......awww, you poor man.

Cram a sock in it. I got through 8 years of phony Clinton lip-biting "I feel your pain" pandering for the cameras. Suck it up and stop whining.
 
Written By: shark
URL: http://
So, he wants a filibuster, but can’t be bothered to actually go to work to prevent this "ideological coup", as he calls it? And instead, he’s phoning it in.

The criticism he endured for not taking his job seriously, as evidenced by his poor attendance record and lack of legislative record, was apparently well deserved.

 
Written By: Fredrik Nyman
URL: http://
Seems to me that libertarians also support the idea that the president (WINNER OF ELECTION) has the perrogative to get his nominee seated on the bench as long as they’re qualified (which is why there was no love for Miers).
So do extreme-left-of-center Democrats. So what?

If you truly believe in a cause, truly believe in it, you will do everything legal to support it. There is nothing inconsisent with contending that Bush has the authority to appoint a nominee, but at the same time contend that he should appoint a libertarian, a true one, and not an authoritarian.

This site has time and time again railed against Supreme Court decisions, presumably based on their prinicples. And now Alito comes along - someone who is philosophically and professionally opposed to the cause of libertarianism. And this site does not raise a peep.

Not a peep. Even though it is their god-given and man-recognized right to do so.

I don’t care if you have beliefs and opinions. I respect any person who has principles they are willing to advocate - provided they are not racist, sexist, homophobic or anti-religious. But if you are willing to sacrifice them just to make sure Bush scores political points, then you deserve no respect.

If you are not doing everything you can to oppose Alito’s nomination to the high court, then you cannot call yourself a libertarian. It’s that simple.

This site is inhabited by Bush lovers. But the libertarians have left the building.
 
Written By: mkultra
URL: http://
Actually, along with MKultra, I can’t figure you guys out either. I’m pretty hep to the libertarian politics over on Hit & Run because, well, it adds up. A government that invades one’s privacy for reasons that, based on the word of the FBI (who, sure, could be covering ass), seems a bit unnecessary, one so doggedly hostile to transparency - even down to vetting the responses to Hurricane Katrina or frickin’ energy policy - and one with an expansive, expensive government, getting involved in several high-profile end-of-life cases, dictating choices on abortion, introducing a massive entitlement program (Medicare D), all along with an equally grandiose foreign policy....I dunno...that’s big, secretive government, isn’t it? Are you going to bend over that far for lower (and, given the budget constraints, unsustainable) taxes? Where are you guys on those questions?
 
Written By: Jeff Bull
URL: http://myverybrain.blogspot.com
Jeff, MK has reading comprehension problems. There’s been no shortage of criticism on this blog addressed towards the Bush administration, etc. My own position is that Presidents ought to get their nominees, unless those nominees are criminals, unqualified, etc. I think voting against a nominee simply because "I disagree with him on issue X" is a dangerous, dangerous path.

I like some of what I see in Alito, I’m wary of other things. I do, however, think the Left generally overstates the case against him on meager evidence. For instance, Alito ruled that, in that particular case for reasons specific to that case, the cops had a reasonable expectation that they could search occupants of the house; that they were acting in a reasonable manner. Not that "strip searching kids without a warrant is fine and dandy". His ruling was much more limited and did nothing more than suggest the cops should be given the benefit of the doubt in that particular circumstance.

In any case, our positions on the Drug Bill, aspects of our foreign policy and many other areas have been discussed repeatedly. MK chooses not to acknowledge them, but that’s his own problem.
 
Written By: Jon Henke
URL: http://www.QandO.net
This isn’t about Alito. This is about Kerry ’08. But then, for him, what isn’t?
A classic line.
But what then of Kennedy echoing Kerry? It’s a sure bet Teddy’s not running; and it’s an equally sure bet he doesn’t do much of anything unless he sees some gain in it for himself....so what’s in it for him?

And MK;
This site has time and time again railed against Supreme Court decisions, presumably based on their prinicples. And now Alito comes along - someone who is philosophically and professionally opposed to the cause of libertarianism. And this site does not raise a peep.

Not a peep. Even though it is their god-given and man-recognized right to do so.
There are two issues at work, here. One is being qualified for the office. The other is the ideology of the nominee. One is rightfully part of the confirmation process. One is not. Do you have a bloody clue which is which?

 
Written By: Bithead
URL: http://bitheads.blogspot.com
A government that invades one’s privacy for reasons that, based on the word of the FBI (who, sure, could be covering ass), seems a bit unnecessary, one so doggedly hostile to transparency - even down to vetting the responses to Hurricane Katrina or frickin’ energy policy - and one with an expansive, expensive government, getting involved in several high-profile end-of-life cases, dictating choices on abortion, introducing a massive entitlement program (Medicare D), all along with an equally grandiose foreign policy....I dunno...that’s big, secretive government, isn’t it? Are you going to bend over that far for lower (and, given the budget constraints, unsustainable) taxes? Where are you guys on those questions?
Why don’t you read the blog and find out instead of assuming you know. The search engine is ready when you are.
 
Written By: McQ
URL: http://www.qando.net/
And when they start actually looking at Alito’s rulings, it will help.
But no, let’s not do that, let’s assume everything that was invented during the
hearings is true.

The man received excellent reviews from people other than the Bush administration, or people that were likely to be in their pocket.
But screw those people. We’re talking about the possibility that Alito (and
at least 4 other justices
) will overturn Abortion, and rule that the President has the power to do anything he wants!

We’re talking about being concerned that he’ll ignore the little people, by doing things like, I don’t know.... approving the Constitutionality of confiscation of private property to give to other private owners on the premise that it’s okay because it might help the tax base!
We need MORE rulings like that one I suppose, to satisfy Teddy and Chuck and Dianne and Paddy that a justice is on the side of the little guy. We need Alito’s oath that he’ll find new rights for city government to improve the tax base hidden in phrases like "nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation." It was, after all, those right wing bastards O’Connor, Scalia, Rehnquist and Thomas that were against that!
Think of it! Alito probably would have voted with those people! Cackling and grinning madly along with them the whole time as he crushed the rights of cities everywhere!
 
Written By: looker
URL: http://
I’m pretty hep to the libertarian politics over on Hit & Run because, well, it adds up.
Jeff, if you think the wise-cracking, too-hip-for-words writers at Hit and Run represent the complete spectrum of libertarian thinking, then you’re sadly mistaken. In addition to following McQ’s advice about checking out what this blog has to say, you can also look through alternatives such as vodkapundit.com and dailypundit.com. Plus Cox and Forkum. Or try the folks over at samizdata.net. I personally find all of those far preferable to Hit and Run.

I was a 15-year subscriber to Reason until this year. I finally gave up on the current crew. Under the editorship of Nick Gillespie, the quality of thinking and writing at Reason (and thereby Hit and Run) has fallen drastically in recent years.
 
Written By: Billy Hollis
URL: http://
He’s beyond parody.

My favorite was when he tried to claim the mantle of an outsider to push a reform message.

 
Written By: Geek, Esq.
URL: http://
Actually, along with MKultra, I can’t figure you guys out either.

Well it takes awhile, Jeff.
When I first visited this site, about a year ago, I too was perplexed at the soi-disant libertarians who author this blog. It seemed that the majority of the posts here are meant to discredit and ridicule those on the political Left. But after a few months, it seemed clear that the authors are indeed of the libertarian persuasion. Every once in a while, a post will emerge critical to the current administration and followers of the Republican party.

I’ve discovered that the self-styled “big tent” Neolibertarians open their doors to everyone. Though I believe that the door does in fact swing to the Right and thus more inviting to the Right-wing and the Republicans.
Because of course, who has the time for Lefties. The Republicans are all about the cornerstones of libertarian philosophy; fiscal responsibility, limited government, and individual liberties.

Also, I believe that the primary intention here is to further the cause of the War in Iraq. And to justify foreign policy actions by revisiting motivations; spreading democracy in the Middle-East is the key combating terror.

So keep reading Jeff. And I assure you, that after a few months, you will begin to understand the nuances that are Libertarian and Neolibertarian.
(btw, don’t let McQ’s cool demeanor dissuade you. He’ll warm up to you after a while.) ;)
 
Written By: PogueMahone
URL: http://
Oh wait. That “key to combating terror” is the wrong link. Here is the one.
 
Written By: PogueMahone
URL: http://
Also, I believe that the primary intention here is to further the cause of the War in Iraq.
The "primary intention" here is to write about the stuff that I’m thinking about. There’s no overarching pattern beyond what has struck my fancy and engaged my curiousity.
 
Written By: Jon Henke
URL: http://www.QandO.net
The "primary intention" here is to write about the stuff that I’m thinking about.

So I understand. Fair enough.

There’s no overarching pattern beyond what has struck my fancy and engaged my curiousity.

Well taken individually, that’s true. Each one of you may not have a distinct “pattern” if you will, but taken as a whole, like it or not, to the casual observer it does.

That explains why new readers are quick to define you. See what I mean?
 
Written By: PogueMahone
URL: http://
I can’t figure you Q and O guys out.
I nominate this for "understatement of the year" honors.
 
Written By: McQ
URL: http://www.qando.net/
Well taken individually, that’s true. Each one of you may not have a distinct “pattern” if you will, but taken as a whole, like it or not, to the casual observer it does.

That explains why new readers are quick to define you. See what I mean?
Yup ... and I agree.

Shocking, eh?

But it’s irritating when someone reads one story and decides he or she has us all figured out.
 
Written By: McQ
URL: http://www.qando.net/
I was a 15-year subscriber to Reason until this year. I finally gave up on the current crew. Under the editorship of Nick Gillespie, the quality of thinking and writing at Reason (and thereby Hit and Run) has fallen drastically in recent years.

Why? Because they question Republicans?
I find the quality of thinking and writing at Reason to be quite ...umm... Reasonable.
Although they did just lose Matt Welch. That’s gotta hurt.
(but it should be good for the LATimes. That paper needs a little balance.)
 
Written By: PogueMahone
URL: http://
Why? Because they question Republicans?
No. I question Republicans myself in plenty of cases, such as the article I wrote for the New Libertarian "The Supreme Last Straw".

My problem is that the quality of writing and research has declined significantly. I find current articles superficial, with snarky quips substituting for analysis.

Reason was traditionally a bastion of what I thought of as "pragmatic libertarian" thought. When libertarianism becomes dogmatic, it becomes irrelevant. The positions of the current crop of Reason hipsters has become dogmatic on several issues, particularly the Iraq War. They’ve reached the point where they will interrupt a fairly interesting article (that has nothing to do with Iraq or foreign policy) just to get in a gratuitous comment on Bush/Iraq. It’s an unhealthy fixation that colors too much of their writing.

The quality also differs from earlier articles in the areas of depth and research. I got the impression from past articles that there was a fair amount of legwork, research, and thought that went into them. Current Reason articles sound more like something a lazy writer zipped out after a few Google queries. I can get that kind of stuff (with better reasoning in many cases) from any number of blogs - I don’t need to subscribe to a magazine for it.

Finally, the current crop of writers over there is too monocultural in their thought and philosophy. Reason writers used to come from a variety of viewpoints. But the ones over there now all seem to be pretty much the same. It appears that Nick Gillespie only wants to use writers that agree with him, and since his own analysis skills are pretty meager, the result is not something I care to invest my time to read regularly. Too much repetition, and not enough insight.
 
Written By: Billy Hollis
URL: http://
If you are not doing everything you can to oppose Alito’s nomination to the high court, then you cannot call yourself a libertarian. It’s that simple.

Given the track record of the "right wing" justices on the Supremes vs the "left wing" (and "swingers"), I’ll take my chances with Alito.

No justice has a worse record than Ruth Bader Ginsburg . . .
 
Written By: Don
URL: http://
The few Reason writers who still seem to be any good are those who tend to "give the war a chance". Not necessarly agree with the war, but are not dogmatically opposed, either. Like Michael Young.

Reason has definitly gone downhill.
 
Written By: Don
URL: http://
Kennedy give reprimand to Alito on Concience.
That Chap is no quitter.
 
Written By: frankbank
URL: http://
I’d like you all to consider something though.

We’ve seen an awful lot of calls over the last couple of years from frustrated Republicans and libertarians who tell us that they are frustrated because they don’t see President Bush vetoing spending bills, because they don’t see Republicans fighting the increased spending trends. They question some of the centrist nominees being sent for various offices, and they wonder why these people are not standing on principle and bringing forth nominees that are truly libertarian or truly Republican. They wonder why President Bush hasn’t vetoed a spending bill. They wonder why congressional spending has been going up.

Back to the Democrats;

What Senator Reid is doing is simple; He’s being a liberal.. and making a show out of the loss. He’s doing on the Democrat side, what the Republican/Libertarian base has been calling for on theirs. He’s making a show out of fighting what he mistakenly believes in, while the rest of the Democratic party is apparently succumbing to the reality of the situation. The Republicans mean time have decided to keep their powder dry, knowing that they don’t have the votes to get what they really want by , and so we find both parties treading water, and spending money.

The similarity of the situations of the two parties is rather striking. The fact of the matter is that the Republicans have not had enough votes in Congress to follow their spoken agenda. They have therefore decided to go with what they could. I see the Democrats being in a similar situation (if a little bit weaker than the Republicans at the moment).... they see they don’t have the votes to carry off anywhere near what they wanted to do, either... and so both sides go long to get along, getting what they can out of the system that results.

The problem for both parties at the moment is as I’ve been saying for years; neither has the votes to get what they want done. A slight and simple majority of R’s over D’s isn’t enough to break the stalemate. With the number of people laughing and giggling over the apparent political suicide of Senators Kerry, Kenney and Reid, perhaps it would be worthwhile noting that what these are doing is precisely what they were asking the republicans including President Bush to do over the last several years.
 
Written By: Bithead
URL: http://bitheads.blogspot.com

 
Add Your Comment
  NOTICE: While we don't wish to censor your thoughts, we do blacklist certain terms of profanity or obscenity. This is not to muzzle you, but to ensure that the blog remains work-safe for our readers. If you wish to use profanity, simply insert asterisks (*) where the vowels usually go. Your meaning will still be clear, but our readers will be able to view the blog without worrying that content monitoring will get them in trouble when reading it.
Comments for this entry are closed.
Name:
Email:
URL:
HTML Tools:
Bold Italic Blockquote Hyperlink
Comment:
   
 
Vicious Capitalism

Divider

Buy Dale's Book!
Slackernomics by Dale Franks

Divider

Divider