January 08, 2006
Bloviation Continues
The florid countenance to the left belongs to Senator Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.) who has written a hyper-partisan screed and actually had it published in the Washington Post, (you of course, are not surprised that WaPo published it.) The title is quite interesting if you will; "Alito's Credibility Problem" which might be OK if it came from someone with some shred of credibility himself. Kennedy's frequent bombastic attacks on anything and everything coming from conservatives, Republicans or anyone/anything to the right of Kennedy have made him a laughing stock for anyone capable of rational thought.
Kennedy has made a name for himself based primarily on scandals ranging from his infamous drinking bouts, to him and Chris Dodd and waitresses, to weekend parties with cousins and of course to Chappaquiddick. It has not hurt him that he had a famous brother who got elected to the presidency.
Ed Whalen, writing in Bench Memos for National Review Online has done a credible job of slicing and dicing the utter leftist nonsense from Kennedy. A sample:
After a thorough investigation, the American Bar Association unanimously gave Judge Alito its highest rating (“well qualifiedâ€Â) on its criteria of “integrity, professional competence and judicial temperament.†But that hasn’t stopped Teddy Kennedy from cobbling together a nasty hit piece on Judge Alito (“Alito’s Credibility Problemâ€Â) in today’s Washington Post.Senator, Alito is NOT THE ONE WITH A CREDIBILITY PROBLEM...Get it?Kennedy’s attack is a jumble of distortions, inventions, and non sequiturs. In the interest of brevity, I’m going to refrain from revisiting Kennedy’s own credibility. Here’s a quick response to Kennedy’s five stated areas of concern:
1. Alito’s 1985 job application essay sets forth a classic statement of American principles: “I believe very strongly in limited government, federalism, free enterprise, the supremacy of the elected branches of government, the need for a strong defense and effective law enforcement, and the legitimacy of a government role in protecting traditional values. In the field of law, I disagree strenuously with the usurpation by the judiciary of decisionmaking authority that should be exercised by the branches of government responsible to the electorate.â€Â
Kennedy asserts, without anything resembling an argument, that these views “raise serious concerns about [Alito’s] ability to interpret the Constitution with a fair and open mind.†He also claims that Alito tried to distance himself from those views by telling Kennedy that he “was just a 35-year-old seeking a job.†A well-informed source tells me that Kennedy’s quote is a concoction and that Alito has never tried to suggest that the 1985 essay was not a genuine statement of his views at that time.
What to make of the Senator from Massachusets? I'm not sure. It is obvious from the frequent gaffes he makes (even worse than the worst of the Bushisms) from the recent "Goldwater Presidency" (discussed in yesterday's entry "Bottle Of Wine..." a couple of posts below) to the hillarious stumbling almost drunken "Osama Obama" (he was trying to come up with Barack Obama) that Kennedy isn't hitting on all cylinders. Yet, the good people of Massachusets keep electing this embarrassment. He has been kicked out of school for cheating, he has been complicit in the death of a young woman, he has been a philanderer and yet...and yet, he keeps getting elected (along with the equally embarrasing, sloppy saluting, pseudo-hero, "the haughty, French-looking Massachusetts Democrat, who by the way served in Vietnam.") (and a tip of the GM Chapeaux to James Taranto). What can be wrong with the thinking peoples of Massachusets?
Abraham Lincoln said that you can "...fool all of the people some of the time, and some of the people all of the time but you can't fool all of the people all of the time." Obviously, Kennedy and Kerry are trying to prove Lincoln wrong, I'd guess, when it comes to Massachusets politics.
Posted by GM Roper at January 8, 2006 06:41 PM | TrackBackMore and more I am getting to believe that most Dems and all Liberals just cannot, or will not, think.
If you really want to read some tripe, go to our local newspaper and read the letters section. Most of it makes one wonder just what Americans care about and/or think about important issues. Is there much behind those eyes?
I need something uplifting.
I think I will go listen to some John Philip Sousa and remember better days.
Posted by tad at January 8, 2006 08:20 PM
Calculating Democrats who might want to be Senator will not risk running against him prematurely for fear of destroying their careers. The Massachusetts Democratic machine can be as unpleasant to wayward liberals as it is to conservatives.
A ridiculous percentage of Massachusetts voters have irrational reasons for voting Democrat:
They are Irish, and therefore must be Democrats.
They are educated, and therefore cannot be Republicans (you can be a Green or a Socialist).
They are black, see "Irish" above.
They are union, see "Irish" above.
Funny how groups that would strive mightily to refute any stereotype others would put on them so willingly lock themselves in that box from the inside.
Posted by Assistant Village Idiot at January 8, 2006 09:14 PM
Asst. Village Idiot,
You've got this, sadly, too right. Sheep, lemmings, buffalo often have more brains than many voters. Politicians know who the idiots are and say all the "right" things to push their buttons and maintain their control. Gad. They just don't get it that they can actually read, do a little research and possibly discover that they could get better leaders.
I lament how very little the electorate reads, thinks and participates in our representative democracy. Having worked at polling stations a couple of times just to see how it works, I know how few vote and of those few, how really little they know.
By the way, you might change your name to Assistant Village Sage
Posted by tad at January 8, 2006 10:46 PM
Credentials: lived in MA all my life, registered voter since 1975, never once voted Democrat and, therefore, never for Kennedy (or Kerry).
My two cents:
AVI is mostly correct in that the vast majority of voters here are Democrats, liberals, union; not so much Irish anymore.
Voters here vote first for the incumbant and second for the Democrat.
The only credible Republican candidate to run against Teddy was Mitt Romney who, at the time, was a political neophyte that ran a clean, respectful campaign. He was smoked in the election by Teddy.
Kennedy's are royalty here in MA. His foibles are seen as "personal" transgressions deserving of forgiveness and of little consequence when evaluating his role as Senator.
He brings home the pork - i.e.; The Big Dig (which is still digging, btw).
So, I guess sheep is the right metaphor and Teddy is the sheppard.
Posted by too many steves at January 9, 2006 06:38 AM
Our current president Mr. Bush isn't exactly a prize!
Lets talk about the drinking and being in the service.
Senator Kenndy, alcoholic, Mr. Bush an alcoholic, Senator Kerry in vietnam, Mr. Bush where?
Mr. Bush stop drinking when he was 40. That's pretty cool and it would have been nice if he did it on his own, but guess what his wife gave him an ultimatum it was either her or Jim Bean. Real good family values. I can imagine when his children came home from school asking the question wheres dad and Mrs Bush (mom) answering oh! he is in the bottle again.
Military service he (Mr. Bush) spent his sitting on a bar stool exercising his elbow. Oh yeah! he was in the service at the same time Kerry was. But he never faught in the war. It must have been nice sitting on that bar stool while all of his buddy's where being shot at.
Posted by Theresa at January 9, 2006 04:45 PM
It must be nice sitting at the feet of the communist North Vietnamese and giving them encouragement to hold on while you criticize our troops being shot at and undermine support for them--wait, that's not nice...that's what Kerry did.
BTW, are you saying that anyone who served or serves in the National Guard or Reserves is not deserving of thanks for their roles in our nation's defense? I'm sure that the thousands who sacrifice to do that would be interested.
Finally, I give credit to Bush to stop his destructive behavior, which is more than Kennedy can do. If Kennedy had stayed sober on his midnight ride, there would be at least one more person alive today.
So, today, Bush doesn't drink and he serves his military with honor as its Commander-in-Chief. It's nice that he moves forward despite the attacks by non-patriotic drunks.
Posted by Woody at January 9, 2006 04:55 PM
Chronic alcohol abuse eventually damages the brain; Teddy`s critical thinking skills are approaching his driving abilities!
Hey Theresa:
Mr. Bush stop drinking when he was 40. That's pretty cool and it would have been nice if he did it on his own, but guess what his wife gave him an ultimatum it was either her or Jim Bean. Real good family values.
At least he stopped drinking; Kennedy never has, and the rest of the people you admire so much may as well be hitting the sauce as they think and act like drunken college kids on spring break.
Oh, and George Bush was not a war criminal, like John F(lunking) Kerry has admitted to being. But then, he never recommended himself for medals for paper cuts, or badmouthed his comrads in arms and country.
Who would you rather have? Give me an honest man like Bush any day!
Posted by Tim Birdnow at January 9, 2006 06:19 PM
