Democrats-Governors

Why Can Sen. Judd Gregg See What Obama Can’t?

dlindorff — Fri, 13 Feb 2009 11:38:40 -0500

By Dave Lindorff

Hand it to Sen. Judd Gregg (R-NH). The conservative senator from
the Granite State turned down an appointment to the position of
President Barack Obama’s Secretary of Commerce citing “irreconcilable
differences.”

Citing the latest Senate vote on Obama’s economic stimulus package,
for which Gregg voted “no,” Gregg said, “ We are functioning from a
different set of views on many critical items of policy."

Truth to tell, that can be said about the entire Republican Party,
in both House and Senate, which voted almost unanimously against
Obama’s signature domestic effort to date to try and kick-start the
economy. The House vote on the measure was completely along party lines
with no defections, while in the Senate, only three liberal Republican
senators voted for that chamber’s version of the $800-billion bill—but
only after those three Republicans had managed to sabotage it, probably
fatally, by forcing Obama and Senate Democrats to agree to making a
third of the bill be in the form of meaningless and useless tax cuts,
instead of programs to ease the plight of laid-off workers and people
losing their homes.

The fact is, Obama and his supposedly brilliant political
strategists have adopted a bone-headed approach of trying to seem
“post-partisan” which has led them directly into a Republican trap on
many key policy fronts. The economy is just one such area, where
Republicans let Obama water down his stimulus program in an effort to
woo them, and then simply voted against the package in the end. The war
in Afghanistan is another example, where Obama has been so busy buying
into the right’s agenda of continued war that he is about to commit the
nation to years more of expanded war in that war-torn region. Even
Obama’s cabinet picks have been terrible, made with an eye to appearing
“centrist” and even Republican-friendly, with many key holdovers, like
Defense Secretary Robert Gates, or appointments like Treasury Secretary
Tim Geithner, Bush’s pick for head of the New York Federal Reserve
Bank, not to mention his attempt to put a Republican in as Commerce
Secretary.

That last botched appointment was particularly pathetic. It had
offered Obama the chance to pick up a key Democratic vote in the
Senate, since if Gregg had taken the job and left his Senate seat, the
Democratic governor of New Hampshire could, and surely would have
appointed a Democratic replacement. But Obama, again wanting to show
his post-partisanship, cut a deal with Gregg in which the governor
agreed to appoint a Republican replacement.

Having seen how needing to get two Republican votes in order to
avoid filibusters in the Senate on key legislation can destroy the
legislation, Obama now needs to rectify this mistake.

It’s clear that, even if Obama doesn’t sink himself as he has been
doing, that the Republicans are out to sabotage his presidency. That
being the case, Obama should change course immediately and develop a
new strategy based upon confronting and attacking the Republicans in
Congress forcibly. One way to do that would be to name a few liberal
(not Gregg-style) Republican Senators from states with Republican
governors to posts in the cabinet. Example: Maine Senator Olympia
Snowe, who has served on the Senate finance committee and on a
subcommittee on small business, would make an excellent commerce
secretary (much better than Gregg, who at one point had called for the
abolition of the department), and if appointed, could be replaced by
Maine’s Democratic Governor John Baldacci with a Democratic senator.
Obama could also put Gates out to pasture and name the other Maine
Senator, Susan Collins, as Defense Secretary. Collins has served on
both the Senate Homeland Security and Armed Services committees, and it
would be a great idea to have a woman running the Defense Department.
Again, Maine’s Democratic governor could replace Collins with a
Democratic Senator, giving Obama 60 votes, eliminating his need to
cater to that treacherous turncoat, Connecticut Senator Joseph
Lieberman, who backed McCain last fall, and who renounced his
Democratic Party membership after being denied the party’s nomination
back in 2006. (This calculus assumes an eventual win by Democrat Al
Franken in the still-unresolved Minnesota Senate race.)

Even short of enhancing the Democratic margin in the Senate, Obama
could change the political climate in the Upper House by making it
clear that Republicans who obstruct his agenda will be barred from
having any legislation passed for the next four years. Their bills will
not get hearing, and if somehow passed, will be vetoed. He and his
Democratic Party allies in the Senate, should, in other words, start
treating Republicans in the Senate the way they were treated by
Republicans during Bush’s presidency: as irrelevant.

Even with 57 or 58 seats, Democrats have a much stronger position
in Congress today than they had when they took over the House and
Senate in 2006. They also have a much stronger position than
Republicans had between 2002 and 2006, too. But they, and Obama, are
still acting as though they are the opposition party, not the ruling
party.

If Obama wants to be a successful president, and if he hopes to be
re-elected in 2012, he will need to simply run over Republican
opposition in Congress and start pushing through the agenda that he was
elected to promote.

Bi-partisanship, post-partisanship, or whatever caving in to forces
of the thoroughly discredited right is called, is a doomed strategy. It
only encourages the Republicans, like wolves pursuing a wounded elk, to
move in for the kill.

Right now, the public is still blaming Bush, Cheney and the
Republicans for the messes in Iraq, Afghanistan and the US economy. But
it won’t be long before all those crises will have Obama’s and the
Democrats’ name on them, which is precisely the goal of the Republican
policy of obstruction and sabotage.

Obama doesn’t have much time to start taking charge of this
situation. A good place to start would be by calling on his Justice
Department to appoint a special prosecutor or two or three to start
aggressively investigating the crimes of the Bush/Cheney
administration, including any collusion with Republican members of
Congress .Democrats in Congress, too, could get much more aggressive
about their investigations in to the abuses of the last two
presidential terms. That would sure signal to Republicans in Congress
that he is serious, and not to be pushed around.

_______________
DAVE LINDORFF is a Philadelphia-based journalist and columnist. His
latest book is “The Case for Impeachment” (St. Martin’s Press, 2006 and
now available in paperback edition). His work is available at www.thiscantbehappening.net

digg_url = 'http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/node/39800';
digg_title = "Why Can Sen. Judd Gregg See What Obama Can’t?";
digg_bodytext = "By Dave Lindorff\r\n\r\n\r\n Hand it to Sen. Judd Gregg (R-NH). The conservative senator from the Granite State turned down an appointment to the position of President Barrack Obama’s Secretary of Commerce citing “irreconcilable differences.”\r\n\r\n Citing the latest Senate vote on Obama’s economic stimulus package, for which Gregg voted “no,” Gregg said, “ We are functioning from a different set of views on many critical items of policy.\" \r\n\r";
digg_skin = 'standard';

DEMS UNITE!

redhed67 — Wed, 28 May 2008 07:18:17 -0400

Well, as we all know, election season is once again upon us. Our choices are, as always, a great source of controversy and strife among the American people. This is understandable as not every candidate fits our ideals of the perfect President.

However, I've noticed some very disturbing trends among voters and, most glaringly, the Democrats. Frankly, it's appalling. I can't get through a blog or a chat room without seeing Democrats at each other's throats, each bashing the views and private lives of one another's pick as the Dem candidate.

You know what, people?? Knock it off. I'm not particularly wild about Hillary nor Obama either, to be honest... but all have a common goal here. That goal is to do everything we can to keep the GOP out of the White House.

Haven't the GOP done enough damage already? For the past 7 years, we've been subjected to two recessions, the invasion of a sovereign country with no violent designs on us, over 935 lies from this administration ABOUT IRAQ ALONE, and the blatant trampling of our civil rights such as our privacy with the warrantless surveillance and with free speech with arrests of peacful protestors and even people whose only "crime" was merely wearing an anti-war or anti-Bush T-shirt.

John McCain has stated that he plans on continuing our occupation of Iraq. He has also stated that he not only wants us to stay in Iraq for 100 years, but is already planning on attacking Iran, as he so playfully reiterated in his rousing rendition of the Beach Boys song "Barbara Ann" titled "Bomb Bomb Iran."

Obama and Hillary's ideas are really not so different from one another. They have similiar ideas on health care, Iraq, national security in general, etc. There are subtle nuances that make their plans slightly different but when it comes down to it, one is really just as good as the other.

It's bothersome that people are saying things like "Hillary is a warmonger"... or "Obama is a Muslim sympathizer." These same lines that Rightwingers were using against the two of them just a few short months ago and the Dems were scolding them for, the Dems are now using. I, personally, never chose a particular party with which to label myself. I consider myself an Independent even though I never formally even declared myself as such... and this is why. Both sides seem to go off the deep end when elections come up and I am so disappointed that Dems have allowed themselved to stoop to the level of "The Righties."

I don't like any party spreading lies and innuendo about any candidate, whether he or she be Republican or Democrat. It's juvenile and ignorant. I don't approve of McCain's policies but I'm not going to perpetuate the rumor that he committed treason while in the service. I have no proof that he did. On the same token, I won't perpetuate the rumor that Barack Obama is a Muslim terrorist sympathizer. We have more than ample evidence that he is not.

Let's think about that particular rumor for a moment. George W. Bush has been more in the pocket of Muslim terrorist sympathizers than anyone else. Despite the fact that the Saudis not only have an appalling track record on human rights but they're also funding terrorists and helping to fund the insurgency which is killing our soldiers... Bush calls them "friend." Not only that but he's also given them weapons which are in turn being used against our troops in Iraq.

Same with Pakistan who has openly harbored Al Qaeda and Osama Bin Laden for a couple of decades. Then there's Uzbekistan, a nation with a record of committing unspeakable atrocities against its citizens...again, Bush calls them "friend."

So to say anything about Obama is not only stupid but incredibly hypocritical if you're Bush supporter. If you're a Dem, it's insincere and ridiculous. We need to pull together in these elections this year and vote for whomever the Dem nominee turns out to be, even if we have to hold out collective noses to do it. I know I will. If a GOP president gets in again, I would hate to look back and know that my missing vote helped to get him in.

So come on... remember that common goal we have to do something good for this country and keep the GOP out.

VOTE FOR THE DEMOCRATIC NOMINEE!!!
_________________
Don't blame this mess on me... I'm an Independent!

WeDemocrats.org

wedemocrats — Wed, 01 Nov 2006 13:35:15 -0500

WeDemocrats In order to stimulate an active interest in government affairs, to restore TRUST of our government, to foster and perpetuate the idea of FREEDOM and principles of a Democratic Nation and to provide for our people through administration of the highest degree of justice, FAIRNESS and social welfare, do associate ourselves together as an official progressive grassroots organization, of the Progressives' Democratic Party. Auxilary groups on Democrats.org and BarackObama.com.
What will help Democrats win elections will be a surge in grassroots energy and a reengaged corps of activists who are working to take their party and country back. 6,236 - IN ALL 50 STATES AND DC!!! It’s a Fantastic Start.
Join this group!

Ron McBride

http://www.WeDemocrats.org

ron@wedemocrats.org

Join WeDemocrats at: http://www.wedemocrats.org/dadamail/mail.cgi/list/maillist/