Monday, January 24, 2005


Ladies and Gentlemen, Your Next Conscience

She may scare hell out of the thank-you-sir-I'd-like-another wing of the Democratic Party, but US News & World Report has one thing exactly right: for progressives, Boxer is rapidly becoming "the go-to politician for the big battles coming down the pike on abortion, the Supreme Court, and civil rights." Elsewhere, an S.F. Chronicle profile by Zachary Coile, "Where Feinstein Woos, Boxer Wallops," presents the contrast in styles between the two Senators from California as emblematic of the choices facing the Democratic Party in a GOP-dominated Congress. And those choices will be tough: in the current climate Boxer's embrace of mainstream liberal principles makes her a dangerous radical, and most of her colleagues will be understandably reluctant to abandon the tried-and-true accommodationist timidity that paid such dividends in the '02 and '04 elections:
The senators' approaches to Rice illustrated the fundamental issue for Democrats in Congress: Should they try to block Bush's nominees and as much of his agenda as they can over the next four years -- at the risk of being labeled obstructionists? Or should they work with the White House and Republicans in Congress in hopes of shaping policies that reflect their views? . . . .

"It's very similar to the debate that was going on within the Republican Party when Republicans were out of power," said Jack Pitney, a political science professor at Claremont McKenna College and a former research director for the Republican National Committee. "Should they be responsible partners in government or should they be bomb throwers?

"I think Democrats are more likely to be confrontational, especially because they don't have control of any branch of government. It's much easier to play the role of the opposition when you don't have formal authority."

No one in the Senate has epitomized the term "bomb thrower" better than Boxer.

The diminutive 64-year-old former stockbroker and Marin County supervisor gained national attention during Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas' confirmation hearings when she led a group of female House members up the Senate steps to back Anita Hill's claims of sexual harassment. She also played a key role in pressuring Oregon Sen. Bob Packwood to resign in 1995 over charges he groped female Senate staffers.

Boxer drew international headlines earlier this month when she delayed Bush's formal re-election for nearly four hours to protest election day irregularities in Ohio and elsewhere. The move was applauded by liberal activists, but she was derided as a leader of the "X-Files" wing of the Democratic Party by Republican House Majority Leader Tom DeLay of Texas.

Boxer's confrontation of Rice spurred Capitol speculation that she was trying to assume the late Sen. Paul Wellstone's role as the conscience of the Senate.
See also Dean, Howard; Frost, Martin; DNC.

President Boxer?

That's a freakin' brilliant idea!

Probably straight from the mind of Karl Rove, in fact.

What better way to ensure a generation of Republican dominance than to keep putting forth lame candidates?
To be conscience to the American Senate, she first has to show herself capable of fact-based observations and assessments.

Until then, her ad hominem attacks, slurs, embedded hooks and innuendos are de facto evidence of her second agenda, her sleazy motives...

Pitiful, mean, small... politician.
no vision. just pretention.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
The high troll quotient on PB's comment threads means we must have struck a nerve. And it's about damned time...

The Yellow Doggerel Democrat
Wow, I never knew there was so much vicious Jew-hatred among the right-wingers.

After all, Boxer is Jewish. So if you despise Boxer, that must mean you're an anti-Semite. Or at least that's the sort of "reasoning" to which we're inevitably subjected whenever anybody dares to breathe a single word of dissent against the neocon élite.
As a Republican, I can't tell you how excited I am about this site and the prospect of a Boxer presidential run.
great idea!!! can you convince Howard Dean to get on the ticket? PLEEEEZE??!!!

*snort* Barbara Boxer...

...walks away laffin'.
I hope you don't mind, but I read your post today in my podcast today. I read left and right bloggers into an audio file every day, and make it available using RSS feeds to automatically download to your iPod or MP3 player. It's called podcasting, after the iPod. I liked your interpretation of Boxer's methods, and your collection of stories from different publications. I was pointed here by Little Green Footballs, who have a different interpretation than yours.

Anyway, give it a listen to hear your writing as spoken by a rank radio amateur. for 1/25/05.

Charlie Quidnunc
A bit of a stretch even for a left of center Democrat.

Most American men are uncomfortable with "in your face" type of women like Barbara Boxer. But leaving that aside, the stats for women voters in the last election tell me that even professional women fell for Bush's scare tactics and failed to see through the "good ole boy" image. Then there is the wave of religiosity sweeping over America. Bush and the Republicans will squeeze the last drop out of that. What is coming down the pike is mean and ugly.

Who would it be in 2008 ? Take your pick: Jeb Bush, Bill Frist, Newt Gingrich---reactionaries, every one of them.
Methinks we have struck a nerve in LGF-land...
@ Dylan--

Yup, and they only slime that which they fear most.
"The high troll quotient on PB's comment threads means we must have struck a nerve."

"They only slime that which they fear the most."

They slammed Kucinich pretty hard, and he's not worth fearing...

The reason you're seeing a lot of comments is because this is such an entertaining place. It's almost as fun as listening to the LaRouche cultists trying to explain why Gauss' proof of the fundamental theorem of algebra has bearing on the presidential election. You just can't pay for this type of entertainment.
Post a Comment

<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?