Voinovich Surprised By Reaction
By California Yankee Posted in User Blogs — Comments (20) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
The Cleveland Plain Dealer reports that Ohio Republican Senator George Voinovich is surprised by the reaction to his surprise announcement that he wasn't prepared to vote to confirm John Bolton as ambassador to the United Nations:
Voinovich, answering questions briefly from reporters Thursday, said he planned to vote for Bolton before Tuesday's meeting of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee because he felt reassured by an earlier private meeting with Bolton in which he asked many hard questions about foreign policy.
Voinovich said he changed his mind for various reasons, including "hearing some things that bothered me" at the committee meeting.
He cited complaints about Bolton's interpersonal relationships that made him question whether Bolton treats people "with dignity and respect."
Voinovich said he also was disturbed by the outrage on the faces of Democrats on the panel who complained that they weren't being given a chance to examine allegations about Bolton.
The reaction that surprised Voinovich includes Move America Forward's radio advertising campaign criticizing Voinovich's action and a steady stream of e-mails and phone calls on the Bolton issue.
The ad targeting Voinovich is tough:
Wife: Honey, were you watching C-SPAN today? Did you hear how disloyal Senator Voinovich was to Republicans and President Bush? Voinovich stood with the Democrats and refused to vote for John Bolton, the man President Bush has chosen to fight for the United States at the UN
Husband: No, I was streaming it on the Internet at the office, but from what I could tell, Senator Voinovich played hookey from the hearings?
Wife: Yeah that's right. He's missed most of the Bolton confirmation hearings, but then shows up at the last minute and stabs the President and Republicans right in the back.
Husband: That's ridiculous - the United Nations needs reform, we need someone who will stand up for the United States and fight the UN's corruption and anti-Americanism.
Wife: Shame on Senator Voinovich. After the Democrats smeared Condoleeza Rice for Secretary of State and Alberto Gonzales for Attorney General, how could Voinovich side with the Democrats in smearing John Bolton?
Husband: It seems like Senator Voinovich has become a traitor to the Republican Party.
Wife: Enough's enough. I'm logging on to Move America Forward dot com to register my protest with Senator Voinovich's office.
Husband: What was that site? Move America Forward dot com ?
Wife: Yep, Move America Forward dot com
Well, I fired off an email to him thanking him for letting the legitimate questions that should be asked be looked into. His comments in the article cited show him to be interested in bi-partisan cooperation, something others in the senate seemed to have forgotten about.
I recall a scene described in The Gulag Archipelago of a large assembly in a hall. Some government lackey made a "momentous" proclamation in support of Stalin or some such thing, and the entire crowd of several hundred people lept to their feet for a round of applause. They clapped and clapped and clapped and clapped, and they continued clapping because they were all terrified to be the first one seen to stop.
My hat's off to Voinovich for letting his conscience and good sense guide him, not his party.
You just compared a Republican dissenter to a dissenter from Stalin!
Brilliant, except you have your political spectrum mixed up -- wrong party.
No comparison intended. The point is marching in lockstep in fear vs. clear conscience and a free will.
Dense, and not deliberately insulting.
I eagerly await stories of Republicans purging and executing Party dissenters so that I can understand the sense of fear that produces a need to march in lockstep by some Party members.
That is a load of hooey. Voinovich wasn't paying attention and then a little heat gets put on Bolton and he decides not to vote. Please explain how he let his "conscience and good sense guide him."
And while you are at it perhaps you could explain why "complaints about Bolton's interpersonal relationships that made him question whether Bolton treats people 'with dignity and respect'" has anything to do with being Ambassador to the UN. Voinovich is a squish pure and simple.
I don't expect to see too many executions. Purgings though...the House ethics committee might be a good place to start. A little rearranging there to ensure more favorable outcomes. Moderate Repubs all through the Bush II admin have been moved out for not being in lockstep with the prevailing orthodoxy, with several lower highly qualified professional civil servants jumping ship of their own volition having seen what was coming about.
Bolton is, arguably, a liar. He does not have his former boss's endorsement. His former boss's chief of staff calls him "abysmal." You know all the rest of the allegations. Do I have to type them all again?
Voinovich broke ranks. And rightly so. And where was he anyway when the committee was meeting? Perhaps working on an issue of importance? Maybe.
I hope that they run it a lot in Ohio!!!!
do not necessarily equate to conscience. They are usually an indicator of a lack of conscience.
Specifics? Which talented moderates were moved out for not being in lockstep, and which highly qualified Republicans jumped? (Aside from the State Department, where "highly qualified" is oxymoronic.)
You are, arguably, an idiot. However, I've seen no irrefutable evidence of that to date, so I'd rather not accuse you of being one, even with the appositional adverb. That he doesn't have the endorsement of his former coworkers is a plus to my mind, given the nature of his former coworkers.
Voinovich broke ranks because there is no real argument that he is an idiot. He was probably posing in front of a mirror.
A little off topic but, I guess you think the name calling somehow makes your arguments more cogent. Sorry, I don't. Nice tallking with you but....
...that requires all African-Americans to march lockstep with liberal principles or be called Uncle Toms and sell-outs?
Oh, that free will? Thanks for clarifying! Yeah, you got us!
With your statement, I'm seeing a pot and kettle, both black, but one calling the other so.
Give it up!
I wholeheartedly agree with Thomas' appraisal of you clearly being an idiot!
When I saw the headline, the first thing that popped into my mind was the sheep from the 4th Hitchhiker's Guide book, who were surprised by the sun coming up every morning, surprised by all the green stuff in the field, surprised by the very same things that surprised them yesterday, etc.
The hyperbole and name-calling is getting a bit thick. The point being missed is not whether or not Voinovich is standing for principle over party loyalty. The point is that he has a lot of nerve expressing his "reservations" seriously after having missed the hearings and having no clue about Bolton or the goings-on. It's kind of like a Senator running for President after twenty years of avoiding work in the Senate.
Incidentally, that ad sounds more than a bit stupid, but then again, such ads are not geared toward the likes of us (that is, the well-informed).
The point about Senator Voinovich appearing to have flip-flopped on Bolton's nomination and having missed most of the hearings is a pretty powerful one but I am afraid it will be lost by the counter-productive rhetoric in the ad.
Using the words "traitor" and "disloyal" in what is supposed to be a pro-GOP ad only feeds into the charges Democrats are trying to make about how Republicans are monolithically demanding loyalty for an extremist agenda, etc.
Ohio's a swing State that could have gone the other way in 2004 and these idiots put out an ad that portrays the Republican base as ignorant rubes who demand blind loyalty to whatever the administration wants.
This is a pretty bad advertisement and IMO if it has any effect it will be to do us more harm than good over a nomination to an ostensibly meaningless post.
. . .such ads are not only heard by those it is "geared towards." A lot of people are going to hear such an ad and walk away shaking their heads at the use of words like "disloyal" and "traitor" and "anti-Americanism." A lot of Democrats will be able to point to this ad and say "see, this is exactly what we've meant about Republicans demanding absolute loyalty to a far-right extremist agenda, etc."
This is not the way to solidify and grow our base.
view here. Its one thing to take him to task for making a poorly researched decisions.. Its quite another to equate that with being disloyal or a traitor - that approach puts a higher value on party loyalty than making the right choice for the right reasons.
And hey, maybe that's what this group is trying to get across - that party loyalty trumps all in their mind. But if that's the case then this is terribly counterproductive because its not the way you reach out to anyone other than the hardcore base.