Republican’s Walk Out - The GOP’s committment to their jobs

Yesterday the Republicans in congress threw a temper tantrum when the Democrats had the nerve to schedule a contempt of congress vote against Harriet Meirs and Josh Bolton as they refused to testify in the politically motivated US Prosecutor firing that resulted in the shameful resignation of Alberto Gonzales. According to Republican lawmakers, the walkout was due to the scheduling of a vote on federal surveillance later after the votes on contempt of Congress.

For a moment, let’s give the GOP the benefit of the doubt. We will assume that they were walking out because of the scheduling of the surveillance and not because they were upset that the Bush administration might actually be held accountable for some of their inappropriate, illegal and inexcusable behavior. Lets also assume that the surveillance program was very bi-partisan and no Democrats would raise objection to the immunity that it proposes for the telecommunications industry that participated, under direct orders from the oval office, in illegal wiretapping of Americans.

Here is my true question. How does a walk out advance the agenda? In reality, it made for much less debate on the two charges of contempt (which passed 223-23), and it still didn’t enable the House to be able to debate or vote on the surveillance legislation. This is a prime example of the Republican’s commitment to the American people: Protect their friends and screw the rest.

The Double Talk Express - full speed ahead

John McCain has once again proved that the Republican party would much rather say whatever is needed to please the party and get to an election, rather than following the Democrat example of speaking what you mean.

This campaign season, McCain is a strong supporter of the irresponsible Bush tax cuts to the wealthy. If he thinks they are such a good idea, why has he repeatedly voted against them?

Good news for the conservatives: McCain says that he would vote against McCain-Kennedy (the immigration reform bill he co-sponsored last year) if it was brought back to the senate floor!

McCain at CPAC talk about not supporting Ethanol subsidies. Maybe he forgot, but prior to the Iowa caucuses, he campaigned on his support of Ethanol and the important role he says it will play in alternative fuel.

Following President Bush’s hypocritical call for the end of earmark spending (much of which comes directly from his desk, even more from the Republicans in congress), McCain declared that he would not vote for any legislation containing earmarks. It is an interesting position to take, especially when McCain has continually inserted earmarks for Arizona into various bills.

We shouldn’t blame him though. It must get confusing for McCain to remember what positions he is taking this week.