"'I’ve always considered myself an opposition within the opposition,' said Mr. Coburn, whose willingness to block, delay or neuter bills through an array of procedural measures has made him an effective nuisance during his five years in the Senate.
His at-times hyperbolic rhetoric, fervent social conservatism and seeming indifference to whether or not people like him have made him something of a lightning rod. 'If we wiped out the entire Congress and sent common people who have no political experience, we would get far better results than we have today,' he said in a remark typical of how he views the institution."
How true do you think this statement is:
"'If you look historically, every great republic has died over fiscal issues,' he said. 'That is the biggest moral issue of our time.'"
With Gov. Deval Patrick publicly supporting the idea of an interim Senator from Massachusetts and with the legislative leaders seemingly supporting the idea that would that bring both houses back to Boston to fix their errors in succession laws for the U.S. Senate.
I support the appointment of Michael Dukakis to the interim position. My long term hope is that a Kennedy is not the Senator from Massachusetts. The impression of an entitlement to a seat in the Senate has gone on for too long. A Kennedy has been in this seat since 1953, except for the two years after John F. Kennedy was elected President.
If the Democrats want to run a liberal in the image of Ted Kennedy there are plenty of options.
Sphere: Related Content
David Boies’s essay in Wall Street Journal today lead my mind to think about how the courts are going to approach arguments on gay marriage.It seems appropriate to question this through what I heard all week during the hearing on the nomination of Sonia Sotomayor.
After the grandstanding this past week about the role of judges applying the law not their personal bias I hope judges in courts soon to hear gay marriage cases follow this senatorial dictum.
Unfortunately, after purporting that judges leave aside bias, prejudice and personal feelings some senators are hoping to overturn gay marriage rulings in Iowa, Vermont, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Maine, New Hampshire and Vermont.They also want to stop California’s Prop 8 from being reversed.Ultimately as U.S. District Chief Judge Vaughn Walker predicted, "I am reasonably sure that, given the personalities in this courtroom, this case is only touching down in this court and it will have a life after this court," Walker said. "What happens here is in many ways a prelude to what happens later."Supreme Court here we come.
"Countries as Catholic as Spain, as different as Sweden and South Africa, and as near as Canada have embraced gay and lesbian marriage without any noticeable effect -- except the increase in human happiness and social stability that comes from permitting people to marry for love."
"There are those who sincerely believe that homosexuality is inconsistent with their religion -- and the First Amendment guarantees their freedom of belief. However, the same First Amendment, as well as the Due Process and Equal Protection clauses, preclude the enshrinement of their religious-based disapproval in state law."
Why can’t we agree that religious dogma has no place in our courts and the discussion of our rights. And neither does hypocrisy.
Senator Bob Bennett (R-Utah) announces he will vote no on Judge Sotomayor nomination to the Supreme Court. His reasons are generally crap but his motivation is that he needs to raise money as he is running for re-election in 2010. I understand Sen. Bennett's concern on the second amendment. But his other concerns are clearly wrong.
Sen. Bennett: "The rate at which Judge Sotomayor's cases have been overturned by the Supreme Court is cause for great concern. Eighty percent of the cases she's participated in that have been heard or considered by the Supreme Court have been reversed or vacated, which further indicates to me a tendency to legislate from the bench."
This is absolutely wrong. According to FactCheck.org, "But only five of her decisions have been reviewed by the justices. Using five as a denominator, the rate comes out to 60 percent." Only three out of five had been overturned. Less than the average. In contrast Justice Alito has been oberturned by the Supreme Court 100% (2 out of 2).
Sen. Bennett: "Finally, Judge Sotomayor has stated that she believes American judges should consider foreign law when interpreting the Constitution. The Constitution is an inspired document and I strongly believe the Supreme Court should strictly interpret American law based on the Constitution rather than the laws of other countries.
Here is Sotomayor answering this question with Sen Coburn.
He also likes to kill legislation. A short profile in Friday's New York Times displays Coburn's penchant for obstructing the legislative process. Is operating as an encumbrance in a legislative body designed to encumber achieving anything positive?
