Swallow it down (what a jagged little pill)
Carla Axtman
As Kari reported yesterday, the Minnesota Supreme Court decided that Al Franken should be certified the winner of the Senate contest in that state. Soon after, Norm Coleman conceded and Governor Tim Pawlenty made it official. Franken is scheduled to be sworn in next week when the Senate returns from this week's recess.
Part of my own fascination with this particular contest stems from the insane rightwing opposition to Franken. Their casting of him as some wild-eyed, crazed malcontent who is just to the left of Chairman Mao seems more a conspiratorial fantasy than anything based on Franken's views.
From my observation, it's unlikely that Franken will be the liberal conscience of the U.S. Senate any time in the near future. The race was extremely close. And Franken likely feels the weight of all those who didn't vote for him as much as those who did. Further, Franken was an early supporter of the War in Iraq. He may have some liberal stripes, but all his stripes don't run that way.
But in the meantime, the whacko rightwing babbles on....
 |
More Recent Posts | |
Albert Kaufman |
|
Guest Column |
|
Kari Chisholm |
|
Kari Chisholm |
Final pre-census estimate: Oregon's getting a sixth congressional seat |
Albert Kaufman |
Polluted by Money - How corporate cash corrupted one of the greenest states in America |
Guest Column |
|
Albert Kaufman |
Our Democrat Representatives in Action - What's on your wish list? |
Kari Chisholm |
|
Guest Column |
|
Kari Chisholm |
|
connect with blueoregon
Jul 1, '09
Well, when you title a book "Rush Limbaugh is a Big Fat Idiot," you can't expect a positive reaction from the right, no matter what your real views are.
9:40 a.m.
Jul 1, '09
The factual nature of the title of Franken's book notwithstanding--is "the right" really so wed to Limbaugh that they're incapable rational thought?
The rabidness against Franken is epic and silly. Watching heads explode over his seating is entertaining and frightening at the same time.
Jul 1, '09
He may not be as liberal as some define him, but it seems pretty obvious to me that he'll side with his caucus on the most serious of votes. Which will...
Franken will do what Margaret Carter did recently on the cell phone bill. Even though she was really against it and defined it as, "...going to far," she openly admitted that she switched her vote because she didn't want to disappoint her caucus. And you call that leadership?
Republicans are just as bad about this, which is why the two party system in this country is starting to crack. If you don't have the backbone to stick up for what you believe in, and not bow down to your party just because, you don't deserve to hold public office, in my opinion.
At that point, it's more about a popularity contest.
Jul 1, '09
Carla, I agree that the good news is that Minnesota voters finally have their two Senators. That is a good thing regardless of party affiliation. It took far too long to sort it out.
I believe that some of the far right found issue with Franken based upon his books and radio show. Let's face it, being one of the prime movers in "Air America" will not endear one to the rabid right wing agenda.
It is my hope for Minnesota and the country that Senator Franken takes a great deal of deliberate thought on the issues facing him, his constituents and the country in his new role. Like so many others, we will only know what his affect will be by looking back in the rear view mirror.
One thing is certain, while the number is now 60 for the Democrats, that does not imply or guarantee a filibuster proof Senate. I think we may all find this out in the weeks ahead with the Carbon Tax Bill.
11:00 a.m.
Jul 1, '09
"One thing is certain, while the number is now 60 for the Democrats, that does not imply or guarantee a filibuster proof Senate. I think we may all find this out in the weeks ahead with the Carbon Tax Bill. "
It SHOULD guarantee it. There's no reason at all for ANY Democrat not to vote for cloture on bills the majority is able to pass, at a minimum--they really shouldn't be voting against cloture at all.
Vote against the bill if your conscience dictates. But not a single member of the caucus should enable the Republicans to simply block legislation, standing by and hoping for failure. Dem Senators consider doing so at their peril, IMO.
Jul 1, '09
We should be concerned about intelligent debate, not whether the right wingers are happy.
How many of those quoted in the piece were part of the "He won! Get over it!" crowd after the 2000 election, recount, Supreme Court decision?
Jason, yesterday in a grocery store parking lot, we saw a woman having a hard time maneuvering an SUV into a parking place while holding a cell phone to the ear with one hand and trying to steer with the other.
I am so thrilled at the requirement for a "hands free device" and the bill making holding a cell phone to the ear while driving a primary offense, I thank everyone who voted for it. Just have seen too many near-miss situations with people talking and driving with one hand (sometimes in parking lots driving forward, talking on a cell phone, but looking sideways for a parking place).
Think back about 29 months ago when Franken first announced. Many thought Coleman a shoo-in for re-election. Which means Franken convinced a lot of Minnesotans to give him a chance. He did grow up there, and anyone who listened to his radio show regularly knew what issues he was seriously concerned about .
12:12 p.m.
Jul 1, '09
Their casting of him as some wild-eyed, crazed malcontent who is just to the left of Chairman Mao seems more a conspiratorial fantasy than anything based on Franken's views.
They need someone to replace Ted Kennedy in their direct-mail fundraising appeals once Ted is gone. Nancy Pelosi hasn't really worked and Hillary Clinton isn't a plausible target now that she's at State...
They're going to be raising money on Franken for years. Which is why I was so baffled they fought so hard to keep him out.
Jul 1, '09
Carla speaks for me. I was in the streets marching against the illegal invasion while franken supported it.....at a time when we should have been able to count on him with his big microphone. I'm in a wait-and-see stance.
tap tap
Jul 1, '09
There may be 60 officially Democratic senators, but that doesn't necesarilly mean sixty votes for a Democratic bill. There is Ben Nelson (D-NE) who could mean only 59 votes. Then there is Evan Bayh (D-IN) who could drop that down to 58. But wait, there's more. There's Blanche Lincoln (D, or whatever - Walmart). That could just be 57 votes. And Mary Landrieu (D-Bourbon Democrat or whatever the local machine is now called)? From one of the most corrupt states in the Union that gave us Billy Tauzin (D-BigPharma)? I didn't tally all the votes in the last Congress, but I seem to recall she cast her share of votes the way Bush and Cheney wanted.
Now there is Al Franken (D-MN). If he was for the Iraq war, he is no progressive. What he will prove to be remains to be seen.
Jul 1, '09
Carla wrote:
The factual nature of the title of Franken's book notwithstanding--is "the right" really so wed to Limbaugh that they're incapable rational thought?
Yes. Isn't that obvious from their reliance on the constant repetition of a few amply refuted rhetorical points?
Jul 1, '09
Help me out here. What in the hell does a cell phone driving prohibition in Oregon have to do with Minnesota's new senator, Al Franken?
Jul 1, '09
As for bills a Democratic sponsorship is not the same as a Good Housekeeping Seal of Approval. Some may be good, some bad, and others very controversial like the recent Energy bill from the house.
4:26 p.m.
Jul 1, '09
The only statement about Franken's ideological position was this one: "we now have a serious progressive wing in the Senate." That was from Glenn Beck.
Most of the comments in the clips are just dumbfounded that Franken got elected. And let's face it, he is a pretty unlikely Senator.
Beck compared Franken to himself, presumably because they are both performers. That doesn't seem particularly unfair; Franken made his name as a comedy writer on SNL.
Democrats made fun of Ronald Reagan, and Franken in fact has arguably less political experience that Reagan did when he was first elected governor.
Jul 1, '09
I do see how Franken can be seen as less qualified than Ronald Reagan or Arnold Schwarzenegger.
Many US Senators have wealthy businesspeople with little experience in government, but access to lots of campaign funding.
Jul 1, '09
"The only statement about Franken's ideological position was this one: "we now have a serious progressive wing in the Senate." That was from Glenn Beck."
If Glenn Beck told me he was Glenn Beck I would demand at least four or five pieces of supporting evidence before I would even think about believing him. He is one of the most preposterous voices in the media - and that takes a lot to achieve that ranking.
If Glenn Beck said "we now have a serious progressive wing in the Senate" then we progressives might consider abandoning all hope and throwing the baby out the window.
Jul 1, '09
Carla says: The rabidness against Franken is epic and silly. Watching heads explode over his seating is entertaining and frightening at the same time.
Somehow I doubt Carla's and other Blue Oregonians' reaction here would be radically different if it was Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Bill O'Reilly, or even Lars Larson being seated in the Senate right now as the result of a similar contested election outcome.
[Exhibit #1: the Bush/Gore election in 2000 - which many STILL can't/won't let go of...]
Jul 2, '09
"There may be 60 officially Democratic senators, but that doesn't necesarilly mean sixty votes for a Democratic bill. "
So? We don't need sixty votes to pass a bill. We only need them to break a filibuster. Sure, the Democratic party is a big tent, and not every senator will vote lock step on everything. However, it's almost unheard of for Senators to actually FILIBUSTER their own party on legislation. At least it has been since the civil rights era, now that the Southern Racists have become Republicans.
And just in case some Democratic traitor does the unthinkable, there are still some few Republican Senators, like the two moderates from Maine, or maybe someone with a tough re-election fight, who might be convinced to allow an up-or-down vote in the interest of fairness.
4:07 p.m.
Jul 2, '09
We'll see, Admiral, we'll see ... I hope you're right but don't have confidence. Harry Reid has been in the habit of not actually forcing the Rs to filibuster, and thus failing to make them pay a political price for obstructionism. So, let's imagine the R leadership marshalling their forces with their ususal discipline, and then peeling off Joe Lieberman or one of the right-wing Dems or Arlen S. the recent convert -- take EFCA, Arlen said he would block cloture before & said he wasn't changing his position on that when he changed parties. So R leaders to to Harry and say "We've got 41 votes to block cloture."
What will Harry do? Will he continue the usual game, give the Rs a courtesy pass, and not call out the person doing the "almost unheard of"? Or will he now develop a stomach for whipping, for party discipline, like that shown by President Obama's people the other weak in twisting arms for votes in the House in support of the Supplemental to continue funding the wars that are bleeding us so badly?
Or do the whips come out only when it's "necessary" to achieve a right-leaning policy or compromise?
4:41 p.m.
Jul 2, '09
Alcatross, you could be right.
But 2000 is not really a comparable case, for two reasons. One is that Gore clearly won the national popular vote so that what was at stake in fighting or not over the Florida outcome for the electoral college bears a more complex relationship to democracy & the one person one vote principle (electoral college means that voters in rural, small population states get more than one vote and those in urbanized big population states get less than one).
The other is that Gore did NOT fight the results in the same way that Coleman did in Minnesota. A huge element of D anger about 2000 actually is not directed at R vote suppression or Katherine Harris' manipulations or R organized & Jim Baker promoted thuggery and intimidation around recounts, or even the questionable intervention and decision of the Supreme Court, but that Gore did not mount a thorough challenge and gave up too soon.
If Gore had fought like Coleman, he might well have won. And then of course it would be the Bush partisans who would be complaining now & they would not be in the least bit abashed at doing so. So I don't really see why I should give up my questions when so much was questionable.
There is an interesting DailyKos diary by a Democratic Minnesota state representative who sponsored a bill in 2007 that would have made the law exactly what Coleman was arguing over the absentee ballots -- "no fault," where votes would not be uncounted on minor technical errors.
What happened to that bill? Republican Governor Pawlenty vetoed it, apparently calculating that D voters were more likely to make such errors so that maintaining a "strict standards" law was more advantageous for the Rs. Maybe that's even true in the long run. But in 2008/9, Norm Coleman got hoist by Pawlenty's veto petard & has no one to blame for the law being against him in the recount than Pawlenty.
From a democratic point of view, I wish that Minnesota law had been changed, and we knew what was in the absentee ballots. But in fact the R position is not in favor of democracy, it is in favor of whatever is to partisan advantage, which usually involves undemocratic practices of mass vote suppression at minimum.
Jul 3, '09
Posted by: Admiral Naismith | Jul 2, 2009 10:42:53 AM
"There may be 60 officially Democratic senators, but that doesn't necesarilly mean sixty votes for a Democratic bill. "
So? We don't need sixty votes to pass a bill. We only need them to break a filibuster.
Oh, the despair and wailing to come, when you find Madame Speaker unable to deliver even this, on your most critical lege. Let her demonstrate. Climate change bill...NP!
Jul 3, '09
Bicameral, not metacameral, Tony.
Of course, if you mean the way that those little tete a tetes to resolve Senate/House differences have gone...yeah, maybe it is metacameral!
<hr/>