Not so long ago, there really were living, breathing Republicans who could be accurately described as "moderate". Heck, not so very long ago, there were people like Senators Jacob Javits of New York and Mark Hatfield of Oregon who were commonly described - without much exaggeration! - as "liberal" Republicans.
Those days are long gone. But there still are a few Reps out there who, for whatever reason, like to posture as "moderates". And our Potemkin press corps finds it entertaining to let them do so.
Georgia10 at Daily Kos is not impressed after the ScAlito cloture vote Monday, which in all liklihood is the end of Roe v. Wade and will send abortion back to be regulated at the state level, until the Christian Right convinces the Supreme Court to ban it altogether. And that's won't be the only casualty for women's legal rights from a Roberts-Scalia Supreme Court. Georgia 10 writes in Chafee to NARAL: Screw You 01/30/06.
Those aren't his exact words of course, but that will be the effect of Lincoln Chafee's vote for cloture. After voting for John Roberts, Chafee reassured a anxious NARAL by declaring "I'm reliably pro-choice." But Chafee appears to be reliably pro-choice only when it suits his role as a "moderate." When push comes to shove - when women's right may truly hang in the balance, Chafee has proved that the only choice he truly respects is his choice to obey the Republican leadership. ...
When Chafee votes for cloture, he is voting to silence those who want to bring Alito's anti-privacy, anti-choice record to light. When his vote brings an unabashedly anti-choice judge one step closer to confirmation, a red-faced NARAL will have to admit that it [Cheney]ed up. Royally. Because instead of backing a candidate that has a reliable(D) beside his name and that would have added one more voice to our caucus, NARAL chose to to endorse Chafee, who today proves he's not even pro-choice enough to abstain from the cloture vote.
When is NARAL going to realize that there are no pro-choice Republicans? Snowe, Collins, Chafee (who all, by the way, sit on the Republican Majority for Choice board) cloak themselves in neutral views, but when a woman's right to privacy is immediately threatened by a judge who has spent his life exhibiting an open hostility to Roe and its progeny, they cast that cloak off and show themselves for what they truly are - Republicans, loyal to their party, squirming under the thumbs of their Party leader. (my emphasis)
But fond myths die hard. Don't get me wrong. I'm glad whenever Republicans vote for something decent. It still does happen occasionally.
Then there's that little matter of the "unitary executive theory", aka, "the President-can-break-any-law-he-wants theory" for which Alito has expressed his fondness. Another bold "moderate" Republican, Nebraska Sen. Chuck Hagel, came out forcefully against Presidential law-breaking this weekend: Bush Has More Explaining to Do on Domestic Spy Program by Hope Yen AP 01/29/06
Well, as forceful as it gets these days from our Republican "moderates":
A Republican member of the Senate Intelligence Committee said Sunday that President Bush has more explaining to do on his domestic spy program and cast doubt on the administration's assertion of broad executive power.
Sen. Chuck Hagel, R-Neb., said he is looking forward to congressional hearings on the legal justification for the secretive National Security Agency program. He remains unconvinced that Bush could allow the program without fully consulting with the courts or Congress.
The Senate Judiciary Committee holds hearings beginning Feb. 6; the Senate Intelligence Committee will hold similar closed-door sessions on the matter.
"If in fact the president does believe that our current laws are restricting him because of new technologies … then he should come together with Congress and say we need to amend it," Hagel said on ABC's "This Week."
Hagel "cast doubt" on the President's authority to break laws at his own discretion. He wants more explanation. He "remains unconvinced" that the President can do that. But, heck, if Bush says he needs to spy on Americans anytime any way he wants with no warrants and no court review, well, shoot, come on down to Congress, Mr. President, and we'll give you anything you want!
That's whatpasses for Republican "moderation" these days. Actually doing something different than the rightwing hardliners is not required to get the label these days.
No comments:
Post a Comment