“After reviewing Judge John Roberts’ credentials and meeting with him privately, I have found that he meets my criteria for judges. And that is: only the brightest, most objective minds shall serve on the bench,” said Baucus, who acknowledged the decision was not an easy one. link
Baucus’s weasel words came after Minority Leader Reid announced he would not support Roberts:
It doesn’t surprise me that Baucus acted like a supine snake. He is one of the worst corporate whores in the Senate:
:::flip:::
As can be seen from this example:
GOP Leaders Engineer Move;
Result Is Seen as Setback for Health Care Groups
Six of 11 Senate Democrats ultimately supported the compromise tax measure without the FDA provisions: Max Baucus (Mont.), Thomas A. Daschle (S.D.), Kent Conrad (N.D.), John Breaux (La.), Jeff Bingaman (N.M.), and Blanche Lincoln (Ark.). All are from states whose energy producers or farmers will benefit from the bill’s far-reaching tax provisions. Daschle is facing a tough reelection campaign. link
And from this example:
The U.S. Senate approved the almost universally unpopular bankruptcy reform bill last night, and — thanks to the support of 18 Democrats — the White House and the Republicans on Capitol Hill can proclaim it a triumph of bi-partisan cooperation. While you’re writing the check for the minimum payment due again this month, your credit card company will be writing thank you notes to Democratic Sens. Max Baucus, Evan Bayh, Joe Biden, Jeff Bingaman, Robert Byrd, Tom Carper, Kent Conrad, Daniel Inouye, Tim Johnson, Herb Kohl, Mary Landrieu, Blanche Lincoln, Ben Nelson, Bill Nelson, Mark Pryor, Harry Reid, Ken Salazar and Debbie Stabenow. — Tim Grieve. Salon
And from this example:
The nation’s environmental health protections suffered a severe setback this week when six Democratic Senators joined 45 Republicans to defeat an effort to overturn the Bush
Administration’s new rule regulating mercury emissions.
Health experts assert that the new EPA rule, which institutes a “cap-and-trade” system for mercury emissions, will cause dangerous hot spots of mercury pollution in regions where a power plant can buy pollution “credits” rather than reduce its
emissions.
Democrats joining in the 51-47 vote against repealing rule included Senators Max Baucus (MT); Robert Byrd (WV); Kent Conrad(ND); Byron Dorgan (ND): Ben Nelson (NE); Mark Pryor (AR). link
He also has no problem torturing people, or promoting “the brightest, most objective minds” that justify torturing people:
The Democratic senators who supported Mr. Gonzales were Joseph I. Lieberman of Connecticut, Ken Salazar of Colorado, Ben Nelson of Nebraska, Mary Landrieu of Louisiana, Bill Nelson of Florida and
Mark Pryor of Arkansas.
Mr. Lieberman said he believed that a president should be able to pick his Cabinet team, barring compelling reasons to the contrary. The senator said he had met with the nominee and was satisfied that Mr. Gonzales’s allegiance was “to the Constitution and the people of this country,” not simply to President Bush…
These three good fellows didn’t bother to vote:
Baucus, Max – (D – MT)
Conrad, Kent – (D – ND)
Inouye, Daniel – (D – HI)
link
And when it comes to investigating criminal wrongdoing by the administration, he is worse than useless:
By ROBERT PEAR July 7, 2004 NYT
… The senior Democrat on the Senate Finance Committee, Max Baucus of Montana, said that given a limited scope of the investigation, “we cannot know about the involvement or knowledge of White House officials” in the suppression of information.
Max Baucus doesn’t stand for anything. He has no balls. He’s stomping on the message of the party, which is supposed to be:
And most decidedly, not:
“Throughout my career, I’ve always tried to reach across party lines to do what’s right,” Baucus said. “This isn’t about being a Democrat or Republican; it’s about being a Montanan and American.”
If you want to tell Max Baucus you think he is a punk you can contact him here:
Washington D.C.(202) 224-2651
Billings (406) 657-6790
Bozeman (406) 586-6104
Butte (406) 782-8700
Great Falls (406) 761-1574
Helena (406) 449-5480
Kalispell (406) 756-1150
Missoula (406) 329-3123
Washington DC Fax (202) 224-0515
*Thanks to jpol for the research. And I am pleased to welcome jpol to the front-page.
Check out this fine related diary by MaximusNYC:
http://www.boomantribune.com/story/2005/9/20/234139/660
Very good diary, commentin on Schumer’s -must-watch-radar-oh-and-the-polls-too-don’t-ya-think-i’d-look-STUDLY-in-the-White-House-heh-even-if
-I-have-no-balls-having-sacrificed-them-to-the-devil-politics.
Baucus: Talk about a perfect counter-example of “What It Takes,” eh, BooMan?
(BooMan gave me that book, and I’m in the thick of the part about the Biden and 20 million of the finest consultants all-nighter political strategy sessions.)
are all a bunch of punks.
Did your read about Joey’s childhood in Scranton yet?
That’s my favorite part. That and his attempts to renovate his house.
I am finding it amusing that “over there” there is gloating over the fact that Chaffee will vote for Roberts…
I am going to try and keep a running score of NARAL endorsements and ratings and their effect on the Roberts vote.
NARAL endorsed Chaffee:
NARAL endorsed Baucus:
NARAL Pro-Choice Montana Foundation members and allies met with Montana Senator Max Baucus in Washington D.C. in April, 2004. Senator Baucus has a lifetime 100% pro-choice voting record.
Developing…
Senator Patrick Leahy, D- Vt., announced that he will be voting for Roberts. He’s “following his conscience”… oh please, spare us the baloney. The top Dem on the Judiciary Committee… Max Baucus is no surprise but this is very disappointing. I was hoping the Dems could make a better showing. I expected more to follow Harry Reid’s lead.
It is NARAL’s fault they gave Vermont an “A” rating for pro-choice.
Note that his emergence of “conscience” came after a meeting with Bush. You have to wonder what went on in that meeting. Oh, to be a fly on that wall.
Maybe Bush said,”flesruoy kcuf og”.
Arrggh! Leahy is backing Roberts.
I don’t fucking believe it. Fucking swine!
My bags are packed.
I can not even get upset because it is so par for the course for these Democrats. All will be swept under the rug by tomorrow and the same powers that be will be propogandizing that to be “good dems” we must fund and vote for these wretched “d” Republicans cuz…somewhere down the road in DLC fantasyland… once we get back into the majority … magically these spineless shiftless Democrats will become pillars of integrity…
We are slipping into fascism and I will no loner be apart of that by supporting Democrats who support this administration and the destructive ideals of the Republican party.
This is no longer a game. People are dying and no Democrat will step forward to stop the devestation.
Who am I… just person with a single vote … that’t all.
…and we got treated to the same thing on dKos, MLW and here. Is it productive? Conducive to effective activism? Makes our case better?
This kind of “outrage” is empty calories x20.
I’m shocked, shocked that some Democrats are voting for Roberts.
Fwiw, the time to make phone calls would have been months ago. Read over the comments in the diaires I wrote then on dKos. I wrote this diary on July 24th on dKos and this one on Aug 17th.
From the comments it hardly sounds like us Democrats were gearing up to put pressure on our Senators to vote no on Roberts. Hardly sounds like we are unified on Choice.
What did we do to pressue Baucus over the last two months? What did we do to build our case?
And when Armando, who has had the bully pulpit on this indulges in this rhetoric too…where does that get us?
In Eminem’s video for MOSH he could have made his point by simply saying…”George Bush is a Punk”…and it would have been much less effective, and easy to dismiss.
Fwiw, there’s a better way. We need to find it.
you mean when Reid was telling everyone to shut up and to wait until September.
I appreciate your constant naysayer voice.
But at what point do you make a positive point? When do you look for the other way, not just the negative?
We all know that Reid has zero control over your opinion or voice. So what do YOU think? Spell it out…
I’ve laid out an idea below. What’s your proposal?
your constant naysayer voice
Don’t try and punk me Kid…
This was decided not today but when LIEberman tied the hand of the Demcratic party with a neutered filibuster.
What is happening today is what was expected …they are just trying to cover their asses as much as possible… Reid sold out months ago… this was just the Kubuki dance
I am trying to do no such thing.
If anything, you’ve created the context for how people view your points and arguments, which are often potent, more than I ever could.
Cynicism can be bring a healthy dose of rebellion and skepticism to the table, or it can be a poison that is merely all NO all the time.
In my view, people come together around no and yes.
We can do better than this.
Sure, maybe we can do better. But it’s an uphill battle when we’re repeatedly kicked in the teeth for our “pet issues.”
The fact is that Parker and many other women have been writing about Roberts since he was named. But there was a LOT of resistance to that, from apathy to aggressive hostility towards (once again) “pet issues.”
Then, at the last minute, others find Jeebus and not only get on the bandwagon, but claim to be leading it.
And then berate us for not joining in loud enough or early enough. What are we? Invisible?
The positive message is that we rally around our fundamental rights, leaving nobody behind. Some would have us believe that this means conflict. But human rights and civil rights are not mutually exclusive. It’s not a zero sum game. We can all stand together around our progressive and liberal (and for some even conservative) values to push for bringing the Democratic Party back to leading the country for justice, rather than nipping at the heels of the radicals in Washington.
Yet on other boards (and thankfully not here) this message has been dismissed, attacked and denigrated, and those of us who’ve argued for our rights, for everyone’s rights, have been accused of “hurting the party” — as if they owned the Party and we were the outsiders.
And when they are the ones with the big megaphones and six-figure ad revenues and elbows rubbing with DC insiders, it becomes a little bit like their Goliath vs. our little David.
And I’m sorry, Golaith does not take any questions.
and well said.
a better word for Baucus?
I’m sure you do.
But, to me, he deserves the disrespect. Maybe he will get weary of being disrespected by Democrats and change his ways. Maybe he lose his mind and become another Zell ‘Spitball’ Miller. Frankly, I don’t care. He needs a primary challenger. We deserve better. And as I point out, this is about a pattern of appeasement, not just Roberts,
I do but I don’t swear – often.
to do a straight up roll call of those on the record as “nos” and those one the record as “yes” votes. And start from there.
Looking down the road, which is your job, Booman, would tell you that there are going to be yes votes.
How do we constructively build pressure? By exhorting people to call based on a playground insult…??? If the blogs are to be a “wide coalition” and a “big tent”…how come our rhetoric sounds like AM sports radio?
Calling someone a “punk” is so easy and cheap…and imo it cuts off so much of the smart, savvy strategic things we could do.
Start with a roll call. Build it with a look at the voting records of those voting “yes.” Take a look to see if they are up for reelection and have primary opponents.
And then use the power of the pen to build a progressive consensus of those opposed to Roberts.
We need that consensus. And you want folks like me and others in it…wriiting intelligent pieces and working side by side.
Enough of the AM Radio stuff as the top headline on the front page. It’s empty calories. And imo, pushes folks away for the sake of a single day’s screaming.
Trust me, there will be a large number of “yes” votes. Do we call them all punks, or do we get constructive and clever? I know where I come down.
From the comments it hardly sounds like us Democrats were gearing up to put pressure on our Senators to vote no on Roberts. Hardly sounds like we are unified on Choice.
What did we do to pressue Baucus over the last two months? What did we do to build our case?
Question: how can you gauge who pressured the Dems ie. who sent letters, faxes, made phone calls etc to urge them to oppose Roberts? Comments on a blog aren’t enough to provide a realistic picture.
we don’t. But, imho, the response to those diaries spoke worlds to me.
What message does it send to write: “Max Baucus is a punk” coupled with a list of phone numbers to call?
there are two points. Number one, to clog up Baucus’s phonelines so he knows people are paying attention and are prepared to hold him accountable, and number two, to treat disrespect with disrespect.
I don’t have any respect for Senator Baucus. He continually provides cover for the GOP on close votes that hurt people. Look at the votes I pointed out: bankruptcy, mercury, tobacco, and torture.
Like I said, this is about more than Roberts.
and quite frankly, booman, you need to show better leadership.
Treat “disrespect” with “disrespect?”
By clogging phone lines and calling someone “a punk?”
Are we on the schoolyard playground here?
That rhetoric and strategy erodes the valid points you make. I expect better from this site.
to live up to your expectations k/o.
How about this? How about Max Baucus starts treating us with seriousness and respect? How about he starts taking a moment to ponder the effects of mercury, tobacco, and no-forgiveness bankruptcy on children?
Maybe he will find that people return his thoughtfulness and respect for decency with the same.
There is a place for thoughtful writing and strategic thinking, and then there is ruining the guy’s day to make a few points about his putting his large contributers ahead of regular folks that need to breath the air, drink the water, and don’t care to associate themselves with torture.
I’ve read most of your comments ko and, from what I can gather, you’re opposed to the use of the word “punk” (or perhaps name calling in general?) and you think that Booman is wrong to suggest not respecting a senator who has been on the wrong side of some important issues.
I’m all for positive vibrations etc however, I do not give respect to those who have not earned it and that’s what elected officials need to do – earn it.
What am I missing here?
that calling someone a “punk” and then publishing phone numbers to call is counter productive.
In my view, if you do that, you take one of the most powerful things we can do…ie. coordinate our opposition to something with phone calls and letters and turn it instead into an excercise in venting that could have truly messed up consequences. ie. folks who call and run their mouths in uncool ways without thinking of the consequences.
Personally, I think the blogs have gone way off base into the realm of juvenile attacking and cursing..I’d like to see us come back to the art of politics and persuasion.
Of couse we’re mad. Everybody is. But what’s the point then? Calling and blowing off steam? Group therapy?
Sorry but I disagree with this approach. More effective would be how to incorporate this criticism into the free speech protest on Sept. 24th in a way that gets media attention.
That would be a smart idea imo.
I understand your perspective, however:
Methinks thou dost protest Booman’s writings too much.
Just inject some pork onto the senate floor and watch…
If you didn’t realize it yet… The Pet Rocks don’t really roll over. They stay exactly in the place they were put by their owners.
YAY! Nothing more than a bunch of paper weights.
Great trick! Wanna see it again?
Are Nelson and Leahy going to be targeted with NDN-encouraged blogswarm posts of their own?
Chris Bowers is not pleased with Leahy.
I am aware there was a conference call last night with PFAW’s Ralph Neas and Chris Bowers. I planned to be on the call but forgot about it.
I also know that Baucus’s asinine statement and timing were a subject of the call. Is there something wrong about that?
Am I not allowed to make a decision to write about Baucus just because I have been encouraged to do so?
As for Nelson, he deserves a smackdown too. And Leahy? He needs a spine transplant. He has no excuse whatsoever. If anything, his constituents are going to be angry with him.
You can write about whatever you want to. It’s your blog.
</stating_the_obvious>
Well, and at this rate, you’d end up writing 30+ such stories and I don’t think we want to read a story about every one of them.
In my state: I predict Murray is a no, and Cantwell is a maybe no but maybe yes since she’s running again in 2006. Cantwell has to be so careful. She’s done a great job of being responsive to the more conservative east side of the state, which is necessary for her to win reelection.
I predict that, in time, as she gets more sturdy incumbent legs, she’ll edge left like Patty Murray did.
I only note the obvious thing I’m seeing all over (and not you in particular), and ask why. I heard about the call’s agenda. I make no assertions as to motive, because I have no idea. I wonder about intra-Party maneuvering, and how that might influence these talking points. And I challenge very strongly the prevailing dynamic of the big boys telling us plebes what to write about, which reverses the cluetrain dynamic and makes a mockery of what “netroots” is supposed to be about.
I personally feel that your post is very solid, and said so. I just wonder how it seems that when it comes to these talking points, Dems like Taylor get a pass in the name of appealing to more voters, while other Dems like Baucus (who’s much like Taylor) get what’s coming to them.
If these were all just manifestations of smartmobs, I wouldn’t be wondering. But as these agenda items are directed by insiders, that’s what raises questions in my mind.
FWIW, I am no longer on the invite list for these calls. Any question why?
…as I predicted.
I’ll be live blogging the Senate Judiciary Committee vote on Thursday. Be there…or not…
Kerry is too. Just got an email from him.
Is anyone truly surprised that Baucus will vote for Roberts? He’s been a shitbird in congress since the beginning, a major sellout on so many fundamental principles the Democratic party is supposed to support and defend.
And he’s likely to have lots of company from the Dem side of the aisle. I’d expect such stalwarts of cowardice and self-interest as Biden, Landrieu, Nelson & Nelson, Pryor, Lieberman, and a few others to vote affirmatively for Roberts. Hillary will probably vote in favor too.
We need to find a way to purge the party of sellouts like these. We need to find real Democrats willing to stand up for principle rather than just pay lip service to it and support them, fund them, and vote for them even if they’re likely to lose. We have to show the cowards who’ve hijacked the party that in the end their failure to stand for anything but their own ambition will no longer be enough to keep them in power.
It’s a long road, this sort of challenge, but the longer we wait to start changng the strategy, the more difficult and lengthy the battle will be.
I’m not sure how Biden will vote. Having watched the hearings, his opposition was clear. But, Biden is Biden so you never know…He told Roberts he thought he was the best witness he’d ever seen in their committee hearings because he was so adept at not answering questions.
Here is his statement.