Two Questions for the Democrats
If they're serious about national security issues -- as something other than simply a political tool, that is -- perhaps the Democrats would answer two questions:
(1) Why would Nancy Pelosi consider denying moderate, bipartisan Jane Harman the opportunity to chair the House Intelligence Committee, and replace her with liberal Rep. Alcee Hastings, a former federal judge who was impeached for and convicted of bribery?
(2) How did Senate Democrats – who claimed that dissident Republican Senators Warner, Graham and McCain had their proxy to negotiate with The White House on procedures for interrogating and trying terrorist detainees – come to reject the compromise legislation negotiated by the trio?
(1) Why would Nancy Pelosi consider denying moderate, bipartisan Jane Harman the opportunity to chair the House Intelligence Committee, and replace her with liberal Rep. Alcee Hastings, a former federal judge who was impeached for and convicted of bribery?
(2) How did Senate Democrats – who claimed that dissident Republican Senators Warner, Graham and McCain had their proxy to negotiate with The White House on procedures for interrogating and trying terrorist detainees – come to reject the compromise legislation negotiated by the trio?
posted by LadybugUSA at 11:43 AM
4 Comments:
The reason for the latter is because the product that was "negotiated" by McCain, et al, was in fact what Bush wanted to begin with. They were our only chance to avoid having the Constitution defecated upon. They failed.
The answer to the former is: for the same reason you disdain McCain. RINO, right? That's the term?
Like Bush hasn't cronied the hell out of Iraq (witness the disaster), the bureaucracy (witness Safavian and others), and our security situation (witness Michael Brown, and countless others). I feel so much safer.
"If they're serious about national security issues.."
Carol, they are not!
So Harman is a DINO? I had no idea.
Jeremiah's post was quite clear. I was referring to Duke-Stir's post: "The answer to [Why would Nancy Pelosi consider denying moderate, bipartisan Jane Harman the opportunity to chair the House Intelligence Committee...] is: for the same reason you disdain McCain. RINO, right? That's the term?"
I didn't know that the Left wing of the Democrat party considered Jane to be other than a true-blue Democrat.
In fact, NARAL rates her 100%, the ACLU 73% and is has been "Rated 78% by SANE, indicating a pro-peace voting record. (Dec 2003)". (Source)
So what is her big stumbling block to the Left?
Post a Comment
<< Home