Redstate

"I wish to have no connection with any ship that does not sail fast; for I intend to go in harm's way."
John Paul Jones (letter to M. Le Ray de Chaumont,16 Nov.1778)

-------------------------------------
"As nations can not be rewarded or punished in the next world they must be in this."
- George Mason

that didn't represent their state.

"A free people ought to be armed" - George Washington

I think its important we call out these cowards who talk a good game, but are STILL looking to cover their ass. Be a man and vote against him if you feel that way.

-------------------------------------
"As nations can not be rewarded or punished in the next world they must be in this."
- George Mason

Erick, for what's it's worth, much of the "toff brigade" is actually hob-nobbing in Davos this week. Self-actualization trumps responsibility anytime....

on the nomination of Gen Petraeus to be commander in Iraq

Not Voting - 19

Boxer (D-CA)
Cantwell (D-WA)
Chambliss (R-GA)
Coburn (R-OK)
Craig (R-ID)
Dorgan (D-ND)
Graham (R-SC)
Inouye (D-HI)
Johnson (D-SD)
Kerry (D-MA)
Kyl (R-AZ)
Leahy (D-VT)
Lott (R-MS)
Martinez (R-FL)
McCain (R-AZ)
Roberts (R-KS)
Smith (R-OR)
Stevens (R-AK)
Thomas (R-WY)

OK, Johnson (D-SD) has a pretty good excuse, but what about the rest of them?

Putting aside the Dems, I think it's possible to account for some of these votes by noting that McCain, Graham, Martinez and Chambliss had already voted in Committee to approve Petraeus and they were busy runing for President or something. But the others...

Any ideas? I know Smith of Oregon is very weak on the war, but Kyl? Thomas?

Boxer (D-CA), Not Voting
Cantwell (D-WA), Not Voting
Chambliss (R-GA), Not Voting
Coburn (R-OK), Not Voting
Craig (R-ID), Not Voting
Dorgan (D-ND), Not Voting
Graham (R-SC), Not Voting
Inouye (D-HI), Not Voting
Johnson (D-SD), Not Voting
Kerry (D-MA), Not Voting
Kyl (R-AZ), Not Voting
Leahy (D-VT), Not Voting
Lott (R-MS), Not Voting
Martinez (R-FL), Not Voting
McCain (R-AZ), Not Voting
Roberts (R-KS), Not Voting
Smith (R-OR), Not Voting
Stevens (R-AK), Not Voting
Thomas (R-WY), Not Voting

11 republicans, 7 Democrats. Nice try though.

12 Republicans
7 dems

adds up to 19

Much as I like to be outraged, it's politics as usual. If a vote is a sure thing (and they almost always are) Senators often don't bother, unless they need to be on the record one way or the other. Like it or not, the actual voting on the Senate floor is essentially a formality ratifying what agreements have been made in the back room.

they're voting for the man who will pursue the war we shouldn't be in, who will manage the surge that shouldn't happen, who will use new tactics bound to fail in a war we're losing. Maybe the 81 thought that the general is going to command the shift to Okiniwa. Just over the horizon.

My how the world has shrunk !

Oh well, back to resolutions and feeding a defeat hungry media the crumbs they crave, now that they got the small stuff out of the way.

"a man's admiration for absolute government is proportinate to the contempt he feels for those around him". Tocqueville

As noted above, this was the big Davos (World Economic Forum) week, so a gaggle of the gang of 100 jetted off for that in preference. A partial anecdotal sighting list includes....

Kerry, McCain, Feinstein, Leahy, Cantwell, Lott, Martinez

That's at least seven of the missing.

Why worry about important issues of governance when you can hob-nob with your fellow uber-important-menschen?

Sure, sure we know that the United States senators who sat this one out because they had "other things to do" are sending a message that the commander of the forces in Iraq isn't all that important to them. Sure, it's a slap in the face to our military and the people who are serving when almost 1/5th the upper house of Congress can't build their schedule around showing up to vote on the commander of our troops in the theater of combat. In the middle of a war. On the cusp of a troop surge.

Sure, it's a disgusting commentary on the fact that probably twice that fraction of the American people doesn't know or care enough about this war to know General Petraeus from their General Practitioner, except when it comes time to vote in a telephone poll saying that the country is on the "wrong track" even though they don't understand what the track is or why it's there.

All that is true. But right now I consider even 81 votes to be tantamount to a miracle. I'm surprised Feingold wasn't throwing his feces at Petraeus.

and then some.

You're right about many of the voters, especially the ones who think Bush should be impeached and/or is doing a terrible job, and they are not all Democrats.

Ignorance may be bliss but it's also dangerous.

"a man's admiration for absolute government is proportinate to the contempt he feels for those around him". Tocqueville

I sent an e-mail to my Senator Smith asking him not to co-sponsor a resolution to not to sent more troops to Iraq. I said it is not right to send a general to the area who states he wants more troops and then vote that you do not want those troops sent. I thought it was a vote to have it both ways. I also wrote that the antiwar faction is the more vocal faction of the war but the majority of us want a victory there.

than the 18 who missed, to me, are the vocal opponents of Petraeus' strategy who voted for him. Saying you don't agree with the man's plan of action and then voting for him to lead they way is intellectually dishonest at best, dangerous at worst.

Biden, Hagel and there ilk should be called to the carpet to explain their "thought" process on this one.

... I think the "non-voters" have a somewhat valid excuse. This vote was held on a Friday. A large chunk of those not voting are from southern and western states, and they probably travelled back home for the weekend. With no signs that this would be a contested vote, a lot of senators felt it was safe to make their trips back to their states.

Still, I'd prefer to see all 100 vote on this. However, Reid's scheduling of the vote made it difficult.

------------------------------------------------------
"I think he's been a great leader, but I don't want my daughter near him." - Claire McCaskill on Bill Clinton

Being from Missouri, I get the honor of having the majority of votes in the Senate being cancelled out for the next four to six years. BTW when the President went on the air to announce the troop increase he singled out Sen. Lieberman as someone who he could look forward to help in this endavor. Does anyone think he might have been reaching out to him?