The only logical reasoning for Senators like Leahy and Fiengold in supporting this Roberts debacle is to give cover to the more conservative Dems when they eventually sell out in the Senate vote.
Under no circumstances does the Democratic Establishment want a repeat the Iraq voting blocques redrawn in the Democratic party. Whereby, those that voted against the Iraq vote where given more “Dem Cred” over those that didn’t. Hilliary to this day can not shake the fact that she was a political opportunist and voted for an immoral war.
Kerry had his Iraq vote hanging around his neck like an albatross his entire campaign and for that many Democrats begrudgingly supported him.
Mixing up the so-called “Librul Dems” ie Feingold and Leahy with the usual suspect sell out Dems muddles the divide. Hilliary can now cast her vote for Roberts with confidence that she will not be labelled a conservative DLC sell out (which she most definitely is) and now she has the cover of her more “librul” colleagues as proof of her “librul” street cred.
One day I wish that the Democratic party would spend as much time as they do figuring out how to screw over their own base… as they would in actaully trying to figure out how to be an opposition party.
Reid’s vote was just to set of the false meme that anti-choicers would protect choice…which is a lie… but tell that to some…
But alas, what more proof do we need that the Democrats never intended to be an opposition group and are quite comfortable being in the minority which automatically negates their responsiblity to DO ANYTHING and their losses can be easily excused, as some are now making excuses for Roberts from 2000… Bush is polling in the 30% and has just oversaw one the most spectacular debacles in the history of the US… but the Dems are still caving in…go figure
