# Why do the Massachusetts senators continue their stupid pontifications? **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [January 28, 2006, 2:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-the-massachusetts-senators-continue-their-stupid-pontifications/341943 "2006-01-28T02:39:16Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 6
**Author:** ![flickster](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/7bcc69/32.png) [@flickster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/flickster)\ **Post date:** [January 30, 2006, 5:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-the-massachusetts-senators-continue-their-stupid-pontifications/341943/101 "2006-01-30T05:41:27Z")
> [@What Exit?](#): > > Just from talking with people IRL and here at the board, I would say that Bush has royally pissed off any Republican that does believe in Fiscal responsibility and a balance budget. But I am only a conservative on Finance so I am not myself a good Representative. I have liberal leanings on most social issues and the environment. > A few people may have noticed I am Pro-military too, but I grew up thinking this = Hawk not conservative, I thought Conservatives leaned toward weak UN and Isolationist policies. > I like the idea of a honorable USA being the policeman of the world with our closest allies UK & Canada. Unfortunately I believe Bush & Cheney have abandoned all honor and set us back decades. > > I am shocked by how much enlisted military personel seem to like him. I expect draft dodgers to be Dems not Republicans. This has bugged me from the week he ran in the primary. > BTW: I actually respect a person deciding not to be drafted, I just don’t respect a Hawkish politician who then has the nerve to attack men like McCain who served with honor. > > Jim Did I take nap and miss the draft being re-instated? ---
**Author:** ![MMI](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/53a042/32.png) [@MMI](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MMI)\ **Post date:** [January 30, 2006, 6:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-the-massachusetts-senators-continue-their-stupid-pontifications/341943/102 "2006-01-30T06:14:22Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > I can’t speak for the OP, but I’d argue that the senators should limit their opposition to objective qualification, rather than ideological differences. That is, the President gets to pick the judges, and the Senate gets to agree or disagree. If the Senate withholds its consent unless the nominee is an ideological match, that effectively viscerates the Constitutional power of selection that the President has. > > I absolutely agree that the Senate shouldn’t blindly accept any nominee for the same reason: this would visecrate the _Senate_’s Constitutional role. Because if there is one thing the majority in the senate cares about it is competence in appointed officials. It’s not like they will just rubberstamp any buffoon of a candidate for FEMA or DHS that the president wants. Why look at their entirely competence - based rejection of Harriet Myers, solely on her lack of experience and having nothing to do with the shitstorm of voices from the Right. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [January 30, 2006, 1:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-the-massachusetts-senators-continue-their-stupid-pontifications/341943/103 "2006-01-30T13:14:15Z")
> [@MMI](#): > > Because if there is one thing the majority in the senate cares about it is competence in appointed officials. It’s not like they will just rubberstamp any buffoon of a candidate for FEMA or DHS that the president wants. Why look at their entirely competence - based rejection of Harriet Myers, solely on her lack of experience and having nothing to do with the shitstorm of voices from the Right. It’s unclear to me if you’re suggesting that Harriet Miers was competent or incompetent. If she was incompetent, then the Senate reached the right result. If you are suggesting she was competent… I disagree. ---
**Author:** ![Squink](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5e925/32.png) [@Squink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Squink)\ **Post date:** [January 30, 2006, 3:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-the-massachusetts-senators-continue-their-stupid-pontifications/341943/104 "2006-01-30T15:15:57Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > If she was incompetent, then the Senate reached the right result. Not at all. The senate never reached a result on Harriet Meirs. There was no up or down vote, there was no senatorial decision, [Meirs withdrew.](http://www.sciencedaily.com/upi/?feed=TopNews&article=UPI-1-20051027-09223000-bc-us-miers.xml) ---
**Author:** ![Zebra](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/c0e974/32.png) [@Zebra](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zebra)\ **Post date:** [January 30, 2006, 3:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-the-massachusetts-senators-continue-their-stupid-pontifications/341943/105 "2006-01-30T15:24:53Z")
> [@danceswithcats](#): > > Sorry that form of address offends you, **Bricker**. Kennedy is a self-righteous blowhard who needs to close his hawsehole. The man has no business standing in judgement of anyone else, period. Don’t you live in Pennsylvania? Aren’t you represented by the honourable Rick Santorum? Sometimes, lost causes are the only causes worth fighting for. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [January 30, 2006, 3:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-the-massachusetts-senators-continue-their-stupid-pontifications/341943/106 "2006-01-30T15:35:04Z")
> [@flickster](#): > > Did I take nap and miss the draft being re-instated? We’re talking about men (such as Kerry and W) who were of draft age during Vietnam. ---
**Author:** ![Clothahump](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/51bf81/32.png) [@Clothahump](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Clothahump)\ **Post date:** [January 30, 2006, 3:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-the-massachusetts-senators-continue-their-stupid-pontifications/341943/107 "2006-01-30T15:43:06Z")
> [@Evil Captor](#): > > John Kerry may simply be doing his duty. I wish he were, instead of posturing for the cameras and making an ass of himself. Alito is more than qualified for the position. This entire process should not have taken more than a day or two, which is a good argument for keeping cameras out of the committee room. And keeping the booze away from Kennedy, but that will never happen. ---
**Author:** ![MMI](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/53a042/32.png) [@MMI](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MMI)\ **Post date:** [January 30, 2006, 4:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-the-massachusetts-senators-continue-their-stupid-pontifications/341943/108 "2006-01-30T16:51:31Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > It’s unclear to me if you’re suggesting that Harriet Miers was competent or incompetent. If she was incompetent, then the Senate reached the right result. > > If you are suggesting she was competent… I disagree. No one ever suggested she was competent. 🙂 (Except the President and Senator Reid) I was trying to say that for many of Mr. Bush’s nominees for appointed government positions in general, competence and/or qualifications has not been required. It may be that the majority feel much more strongly about judicial nominees than others - willing to be more advise, less consent if you will. Given that the rejection (or rather de-nomination) of Ms. Miers on grounds of her lack of qualifications was preceded by ideological-based rejection by the Republican base, I am somewhat dubious that competence and qualifications are the sole vetting criteria used by the majority. I would additionally argue that the SCOTUS nominee’s views on the balance of power between judicial, executive and legislative branches are entirely ideological and absolutely as important a criterion for approving/rejecting/filibustering as are the nominee’s qualifications and competence. ---
**Author:** ![kidchameleon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/898d66/32.png) [@kidchameleon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kidchameleon)\ **Post date:** [January 30, 2006, 5:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-the-massachusetts-senators-continue-their-stupid-pontifications/341943/109 "2006-01-30T17:02:49Z")
> [@EddyTeddyFreddy](#): > > Well, see, that’s the thing I don’t understand, though. How can conservatives – not neocons, but the traditional Republicans/conservatives – regard Bush as anything but their worst caricature of a wild-eyed Democrat in terms of fiscal responsibility? Isn’t that one of the core conservative values? Okay, he’s cut rather than raised taxes – so the tab for the immense deficits being run up is being deferred, but it’ll still have to be paid. Is spend and borrow a conservative value? > > Another core value being reining in the power of government to intrude into citizens’ lives, yet this administration has pushed, and pushed hard, for the right to intrude way farther than any Democratic administration I can recall, and I’m over 50. > > Or is it simply that right wing != conservative any more? Well, that’s why this conservative voted libertarian last year. (Well, there was a lasagna dinner thrown in if I didn’t vote for Bush…) I didn’t like either major candidate. If the Dems had thrown up a Bill Clintonesque type, I might have voted for him. Hell, I voted for Obama. ---
**Author:** ![Polycarp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/82dd89/32.png) [@Polycarp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Polycarp)\ **Post date:** [January 30, 2006, 5:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-the-massachusetts-senators-continue-their-stupid-pontifications/341943/110 "2006-01-30T17:05:12Z")
> [@Clothahump](#): > > I wish he were, instead of posturing for the cameras and making an ass of himself. > > Alito is more than qualified for the position. This entire process should not have taken more than a day or two, which is a good argument for keeping cameras out of the committee room. And keeping the booze away from Kennedy, but that will never happen. Oddly enough (but thankfully for the sake of the nation), your opinion, **Clothahump** , is not the one which matters, but rather that of the President and a majority of Senators. I will have to defer to you about posturing and making an ass of oneself, though; I do respect expertise in a field. ---
**Author:** ![rjung](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/45deac/32.png) [@rjung](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rjung)\ **Post date:** [January 30, 2006, 8:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-the-massachusetts-senators-continue-their-stupid-pontifications/341943/111 "2006-01-30T20:40:52Z")
> [@Clothahump](#): > > Alito is more than qualified for the position. Any lingering doubts I had that Alito might be a competent Supreme Court Justice have just been erased by that statement. Thanks! ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [January 30, 2006, 8:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-the-massachusetts-senators-continue-their-stupid-pontifications/341943/112 "2006-01-30T20:57:23Z")
> [@rjung](#): > > Any lingering doubts I had that Alito might be a competent Supreme Court Justice have just been erased by that statement. Thanks! Tough shit. He’s going to be sworn in tomorrow. Tell us how you feel about that, **rjung**! 😛 ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [January 30, 2006, 9:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-the-massachusetts-senators-continue-their-stupid-pontifications/341943/113 "2006-01-30T21:01:21Z")
Another triumph for party over country. ---
**Author:** ![wring](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/838e76/32.png) [@wring](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wring)\ **Post date:** [January 30, 2006, 9:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-the-massachusetts-senators-continue-their-stupid-pontifications/341943/114 "2006-01-30T21:02:05Z")
> [@rjung](#): > > Any lingering doubts I had that Alito might be a competent Supreme Court Justice have just been erased by that statement. Thanks! While I’m quite certain that I will have strong disagreements w/Alito, that in and of itself does not mean he’s not qualified for the position. IIRC, didn’t he American Bar Association rank him as qualified? ideology does not trump qualifications. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [January 30, 2006, 9:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-the-massachusetts-senators-continue-their-stupid-pontifications/341943/115 "2006-01-30T21:30:19Z")
> [@wring](#): > > While I’m quite certain that I will have strong disagreements w/Alito, that in and of itself does not mean he’s not qualified for the position. IIRC, didn’t he American Bar Association rank him as qualified? ideology does not trump qualifications. He got the highest rating the ABA gives (“well qualified”) in every category-- integrity, professional competence and judicial temperament. ---
**Author:** ![Squink](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5e925/32.png) [@Squink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Squink)\ **Post date:** [January 30, 2006, 10:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-the-massachusetts-senators-continue-their-stupid-pontifications/341943/116 "2006-01-30T22:48:58Z")
25 nays. 72 Ayes. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [January 30, 2006, 10:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-the-massachusetts-senators-continue-their-stupid-pontifications/341943/117 "2006-01-30T22:59:52Z")
> [@Squink](#): > > 25 nays. 72 Ayes. ??? ---
**Author:** ![Squink](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5e925/32.png) [@Squink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Squink)\ **Post date:** [January 30, 2006, 11:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-the-massachusetts-senators-continue-their-stupid-pontifications/341943/118 "2006-01-30T23:03:13Z")
> [@John Mace](#): > > ??? Cloture passed. Good luck with your new judge. ---
**Author:** ![Weirddave](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/919ad9/32.png) [@Weirddave](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Weirddave)\ **Post date:** [January 30, 2006, 11:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-the-massachusetts-senators-continue-their-stupid-pontifications/341943/119 "2006-01-30T23:13:59Z")
> [@Squink](#): > > Cloture passed. Good luck with your new judge. If he rules the way it looks like he’s going to, limiting the unbridled power of big government, we’ll all have good luck with our new judge. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [January 30, 2006, 11:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-the-massachusetts-senators-continue-their-stupid-pontifications/341943/120 "2006-01-30T23:21:35Z")
> [@Weirddave](#): > > If he rules the way it looks like he’s going to, limiting the unbridled power of big government . . . 😛😛😛😛😛😛😛😛😛 You haven’t paid the least bit of attention to this process, have you? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-the-massachusetts-senators-continue-their-stupid-pontifications/341943.md?page=5) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-the-massachusetts-senators-continue-their-stupid-pontifications/341943.md?page=7)