Skip to main content

View Diary: What the Hell Is Wrong With Al Franken? (326 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  I respect Franken for admiting he was wrong on (15+ / 0-)


    And as I just noted in an update to the diary, I hope we can discuss our differences of opinion on his voting with more measured tones.

    Yes, this is a critical diary. (Tame, in my view.) But it's not an invitation to assassinate his character.

    Okay, got that out.

    I'm "THE" Troubadour," and not "Troubadour" without the article. We're different people here at DK :)

    by David Harris Gershon on Sat Dec 03, 2011 at 07:17:02 PM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  Franken sets the tone for character analysis (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      mksutherland, Debs2

      when it comes to the fascist enablement of fascist enabling fascist enablers.

    •  Why would we use "measured tones" when (4+ / 0-)

      discussing his efforts to pass legislation that will cripple the free press in our country?

      Why, when questioning why he'd vote for this, should we ignore his history of supporting measures that lead directly to great harm to this country?

      When multi-millionaires vote for legislation that harms us but benefits multi-millionaires, it's the rankest idiocy to ignore that they are personally benefiting.

      Given the mans carreer and ongoing financial intrest, if he had any integrity, he'd be abstaining.

      As much as I want to see him vote no on this, I'd respect an abstaintion even more.

      She's the sort of person who would not only happily stay in Omelas, but would ask "Couldn't life be more wonderful if we threw a few more kids in there?"

      by JesseCW on Sun Dec 04, 2011 at 07:12:57 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  What if his abstention could have been (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        the tie breaker?

        On your other point I don't know. I'm not sure what is meant by "measured tones". I don't think The Troubadour means we should bend over and take it.

        At least I hope not. TT is one of my favorite writers here, and doesn't appear to be a political pacifist.

        •  He's really got an immense conflict (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          James Hepburn

          of interest here.

          It's like Di-Fi voting on defense appropriation bills that involve millions going to her Husband, or the damned Republican rancher whose name I can't remember right now voting on a BLM grazing lease bill.

          She's the sort of person who would not only happily stay in Omelas, but would ask "Couldn't life be more wonderful if we threw a few more kids in there?"

          by JesseCW on Sun Dec 04, 2011 at 10:40:30 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

    •  So if he admitted he (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      JesseCW, Terra Mystica

      was wrong on this preemptive, illegal war why in the hell did he just vote for this new abomination of a AUMF? Now that's some weaselly political irreconcilable  bamboozling. Hard to deal with it but more and more so called Democratic 'moderates', are showing their true colors, while the state of our nation is fast tracking into fascist mode.  Looks more like collusion then complicity.  Perhaps having the owners of the place control the flow of free information appeals to the centrist The Wayer's as people can actually find out what's going on globally. They can also organize against it and participate in defining reality. Too democratic, not to be a threat, even to a so called liberal comic turned pol.        

      •  Earmarks and/or pork is why, imo. (0+ / 0-)

        The earmarks put into these bills (authorization/approps) is astounding.  That puts every Senator in direct conflict between the right thing to do and keeping promises to constituent interests.  And Obama probably won't veto it, for similar reasons.

        It explains his vote on the Udall Amendment, and his vote for the larger bill when the Amendment failed.

        The real travesty, to me, is that something as earth shattering as this expansion of the AUMF was contained within, and masked by, the Defense Authorization bill.  By a Dem.  That could not have been unintentional.

        This stake to the heart of the Constitution should have been debated and voted on separately.

        •  Pork alone (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Terra Mystica

          cannot explain these deplorable votes. Congress has a 9% favorable rating and that's among all of their constituents. the only interest they are voting for are the owners of the place, and their enforcers the MIC/security state. they are throwing out the rule of law for the unfettered anti-democratic 'theory and implementation of oligarchical collectivism', as Orwell called it. Udall just gave the Vichy  Dems a lame cover which is pathetic, just bad kabuki.

          •  Totally agree on the top-level concept of kabuki, (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:

            who it serves, and everything else you said.  I was just reflecting on the fragility of the cloistered politics of earmarks.  Once they're negotiated and in the bill, no one wants to revisit the process.

            It's weak and cowardly, but a real influence on behavior (perhaps because of the weak and cowardly part...).

            I also think you're gracious on the 9% figure.  After this, very, very few are going to "approve" of the job Congress is doing.  In my little circle of staunch Rs and lib/progressive Dems, everyone is upset about this.  Outside that circle, with people who's politics I don't know, when I bring it up they're angry (and ask for the bill number).

            This may be the proverbial "straw"  that gets everyone to wake up.  Maybe.

            •  The few conservatives (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Terra Mystica

              I know or are related to are not at all happy with what's going down. Their solutions and explanations are usually upside down and ass backwards however.  Strangely the only people I hear defending this horror show are the die hard Democratic Obama fans,  'moderates' who refuse to look at the reality they are supporting.

              One couple we know who were apologist's for this administration and Obama, changed their tune when their son a college student and liberal, got arrested and roughed up in an Occupy Portland 'eviction'. They watched what went down on live stream and they now are not talking 'it's the Republican obstructionists' or any other of the lame reasons given for the Democratic, bi-partisan  collusion.    

              •  Not to digress overly, but what you describe is a (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:

                case for the draft.  I don't know your feelings about the draft in particular, but the general concept of "it's happening to all of us" or actual shared sacrifice is potent.

                Rs used to have a "meme" about a liberal is a conservative who's never been mugged, or something to that effect.  If we ever get into a scenario where we really are in a position, together, of shared sacrifice, watch out DC.

                The Occupy "movement" (the organizers say it's not a movement) has the potential to make that happen.

                To better times...

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site