Skip to main content

View Diary: Frist office lies about lynching roll call (102 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  No the record is not (none)
    there; his bill never got anywhere and no one is paying attention to it. OTOH, everyone IS paying attention to Landrieu's bill, and once Lamar? saw that, he should have signed on as well. That sort of thing happens all the time -- similar, competing bills get introduced, one makes it to the floor, and the sponsor of the one that didn't make it signs on to the one that did.

    Methinks Lamar?'s defenders really are protesting too much.

    •  I like that question mark. (none)
      But do you think you're talking to a Lamar! defender?

      The record, though, is there, but nobody is paying attention to it.

      And nobody was paying attention to Landrieu's bill between February and June.

      The real rush to cosponsor only came when the deal was done and the bill was discharged, at which time many Senators were still out of town. Remember, almost all of this happened in one day. In all likelihood, most of those last minute cosponsorships were authorized and signed for by Chiefs of Staff, and not the Senators themselves. Easy call for most, tougher one for the chief sponsor of the competing legislation. Especially when the issue is merely cosponsorship, given that the deal cleared the way for the bill to pass unopposed, affording everyone the cover to say they supported it.

    •  Several things (none)
      "everyone IS paying attention"
      No, pretty much you, me and Kagro X are paying attention to it.  No one else really is.  The rest of the country is still wondering what to do with that big hole left from the end of the Jackson trial.

      Kagro's point, and mine, is that we should not demand cosponsership of every bill you agree with.

      To attempt to further Kagro's analogy, I don't go back and look at who recommended a diary to decide who thought that diary was correct or not.

      It is my opinion that many here are over playing the importance of sponsership of a bill.  

      Pray that there's intelligent life somewhere up in space because there's bugger all down here on Earth.

      by bawbie on Wed Jun 15, 2005 at 12:47:31 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Sponsorship Varies in Importance (none)
        It is my opinion that many here are over playing the importance of sponsership of a bill.

        Well, that depends. In this case, it is important because Frist's game-playing deliberately deprived the voters of any other way of knowing where their senators stand on this issue.

        Normally, you have a few cosponsors who show by their sponsorship that they feel this is a particularly important issue for them. The others may not feel it is as important, or may have other priorities, but they will still cast their vote when the time comes, thus establishing their position. Frist eliminated that option.

        Over 85 senators (80 or so before the vote) cosponsored the bill, knowing as they did so that this was an unusual number, but also knowing at the same time that the bill was important enough and the circumstances unusual enough that such action was called for.

        It is that high number which makes Lamar?'s absence stand out. And it stands out more than the others' BECAUSE he had introduced a similar bill. Nor does he have the excuse of lack of notice any longer, given the attention the bill and its list of sponsors has received. Also, he must know by now that he can add his name to the list after the fact, as others have done.

        I would not harp on Lamar? were it not for the fact that he had introduced his own bill. I can understand (if not excuse) most of the other absentees from the list. I do not understand his continued absence in the light of the changed situation.

        And if Lamar? does add his name to the list, I will withdraw the ?.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site