57 resolutions and bills defining 19years

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by stubeeef, Sep 14, 2004.

  1. stubeeef macrumors 68030

    stubeeef

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2004
    #1
    Well here is a site that describes the 57 bills and resolutions by kerry in his 19 years in the senate.

    here

    There is an ok thing or two here and there, but where's tha meat?
    And I'm not refering to the pork :rolleyes: .

    If he has such strong feelings on issues like healthcare, social security, assault weapons,..........why no shot at affecting this issues? How'bout atleast a resolution or two for the record. Or did he spend 19yrs debating himself to uselessness.

    kerry is too far left with no record to back the retoric (spelling?)
     
  2. blackfox macrumors 65816

    blackfox

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2003
    Location:
    PDX
    #2
    Well Stu,

    I am not sure why there are not more sponsored resolutions by Kerry on the issues you've mentioned...it could be a number of reasons ranging from the byzantine nature of Congress, to the make-up of said Congress over the past twenty years (rebs vs dems vs Administration(s)...). It could be Kerry's fault, or something else I have not thought to consider.

    At the risk of beginning yet another partisan tit-for-tat, what has Bush accomplished in his Presidential tenure? Or alternatively, back in 2000, when Bush was running with only a scant few years of Texas Gubernatorial experience (Texas has the weakest governorship BTW), what had he accomplished to deserve the Presidency?

    I lived in Texas under Bush, so I knew what we were getting with him as President. At the time, I was willing to give him the benefit of the doubt, despite his lack of experience and past mistakes (as Governor and as a private businessman), and I was severely let-down (an understatement).

    So I am again willing to give a guy a chance, as I know how Bush has performed as President. Kerry may be worse, but he may be better, but I know he will be different and God knows I am ready for that.
     
  3. stubeeef thread starter macrumors 68030

    stubeeef

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2004
    #3
    Glad you were honest enough to say that, cause if kerry couldn't try and affect the process while in congress how will he get them alligned outside of it.
     
  4. wordmunger macrumors 603

    wordmunger

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2003
    Location:
    North Carolina
    #4
    Ummm... because he will be president?

    Seriously, though. It's very hard for senators to get elected president because most of the real business in the Senate is not done in public (the last Senator elected into office was Kennedy). Even a "voting record" is a rather pointless thing to bring up because so often the bills involved entail so much compromise. A vote "against" a tax cut might be a vote for a larger tax cut. Or vice versa.

    Governors usually have a much easier time of it: Carter, Reagan, and Clinton (and of course, GWB) were all governors. Governors can always point to their "accomplishments" running a state, and let's face it, in the natural cycle of business there are always some states that happen to be doing well, so their governors tend to get elected President.
     
  5. stubeeef thread starter macrumors 68030

    stubeeef

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2004
    #5
    Word man, fellow tarheel, I appreciate the education, wasn't aware it had been so long since a Sen had been elected Prez.

    As far as effectiveness at affecting, lets contrast the bills proposed by our own 1st term Sen. Dole here With medicare and other bills I think she at least is trying to make her case and doing so on the record, kerry really hasn't done near the work in 19yrs that Sen Dole has done in her first term.
     
  6. wordmunger macrumors 603

    wordmunger

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2003
    Location:
    North Carolina
    #6
    Well, for most of the time Kerry has been a senator, either the republicans have been in charge of the Senate or the White House or both, so it's been difficult for him to do much. Dole's been working in a government that effectively controls all three branches.
     
  7. stubeeef thread starter macrumors 68030

    stubeeef

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2004
    #7
    WORD man, so because the senate has been controlled for so long, kerry isn't allowed to propose a bill?
     
  8. wordmunger macrumors 603

    wordmunger

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2003
    Location:
    North Carolina
    #8
    \

    I'm not exactly sure how the procedure works, but yes, if the Republicans control a committee, they're not going to let a bill they don't like get to the Senate floor. And if you do manage to get it to the floor, it's certainly not going to get passed. So you can sit there spinning your wheels, suggesting pie in the sky ideas that will never see the light of day, or you can do what you can to influence the bills that do make it to the floor. Not as press-friendly as sponsoring a bill, but still important.
     
  9. mischief macrumors 68030

    mischief

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2001
    Location:
    Santa Cruz Ca
    #9
    I think it's more a matter of Mr. Kerry being subject to a kind of deep (ocasionally morose) introspection. He kind of reminds me of the character Hamlet from the play of the same name. No decision is made without a litany of questions about all the motives and ramifications. Even after the questions decisions seem to be made with varying enthusiasm based on what those questions revealed.


    By contrast Mr. Bush reminds me of the dark character of Lord MacBeth. He drives forewards to a goal of uncertain outcome, ignoring any dark portents so long as he is King at the end.

    Because I can't resist I'll add: Glenwood Forest will walk in Washington... sooner or later.

    I think that the issue of a Reb dominated Congress over the last 20 yeasr has certainly effected the landscape of politics and the flavour of the Dem's decisions... some have gone to a far-left knee-jerk position, some have gone to "third" parties, some have taken to long bouts of questioning. With sixteen of the last 24 years pairing either a Republican Senate, Republican House, or Both with a Republican President is it any wonder that the Democrats who've been in the game a while are either pulling as hard a left turn as they can or choosing to question every last footnote in a given bill?


    I think in looking at Voting records it's ESSENTIAL to include the text of the bills voted on. There are so many instances where x or y bill has so many unrelated add-ons or add-ons that neuter the bill's original thrust that simply listing the bill's original intent is incredibly misleading.
     
  10. stubeeef thread starter macrumors 68030

    stubeeef

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2004
    #10
    I wasn't aware that you can't propose a bill in a committe unless it is to get to the floor, and then there would be no record of it. I thought that you could propose a bill and it not get out of committee, but would be on the record that you proposed it.

    I think this needs to be researched, I contend kerry has not done want he says needs to be done. In fact he has not tried, except to run for prez.
     
  11. mischief macrumors 68030

    mischief

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2001
    Location:
    Santa Cruz Ca
    #11
    I take issue with that statement. One does not spend so long in the Senate without doing at least enough active engagement to warrant continued re-election.

    Not to mention, of course that given the situation he's likely done all that was possible: raise concerns wherever he could find them. It's important to note that Dems don't rally the same way Rebs do. Republicans are quite capable of getting into a bloc-vote on short notice with very little dissention and debate. Dems, by their nature do not. As a consequence they come across not as the "voice of reason" that they strive to be (and likely actualy are) but as a disorganized and often impotent group of not-so-like minded socialists.

    I think that if the Dems ever got their **** together the Rebs would be in serious trouble. In the mean time we have to use a different metric when looking at how they politic. Rebs can be easily measured (most of the time) by voting records that reflect a somewhat uniform and dogmatic set of positions adopted early and negotiated in-party continually for purposes of bill-voting. Dems on the other hand are more individualistic and thoughtful in their decisions. They tend to stay more isolated in their voting and put more individual attention on the nuances of a bill. As a result they form a less coherent voting Bloc but often serve as a multifaceted form of conscience that the Senate would otherwise lack. Where Rebs use Conviction and Faith Dems tend to use Compassion and Reason. It all ballanced out until the Rebs got more homoginous.
     
  12. stubeeef thread starter macrumors 68030

    stubeeef

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2004
    #12
    Mischief, I appreciate your analogizes, but I'm not going into voting records yet, not that at all. I'm concerned with kerry's inability to even propose legislation or resolutions that would show what his cause really is. 19 years is a long time!

    If he needs that much time for introspection, minutes would seem like hours, and hours would seem like days. To me it makes his argument shallow if not hollow.

    Just my read on it, I realize, but YOU CAN PROPOSE, many very liberal congresswomen and congressmen do that, why not mr kerry?

    Voting records are extremely deceptive, like you say, you must look deep into the ramifications and riders of a bill to understand the vote. BUT IF YOU DON'T LIKE THE DIRECTION OF THINGS, YOU ARE A US SENATOR, HAVE SENIORITY, GET OFF YOUR TAIL AND LEGISLATE !
     
  13. mischief macrumors 68030

    mischief

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2001
    Location:
    Santa Cruz Ca
    #13

    I can see your point. I find that it's likely about personality. Kerry had a choice in Service. He could have chosen Air FOrce and been further from the action or even a Fighter Jock. He could have chosen the Marines where snap decisions are all that keep you alive. He chose Navy and was assigned to a duty befitting his personality. As a CO in a Swift Boat he had to have good instincts, keep the welfare of his crew in mind, be willing to call in CAS when neccessary and most importantly: process, analyze and act on a very large amount of data very quickly. All of this adds up (in my mind) to a person who's intelligent, mentally agile, mentally versatile, compassionate and adept at analyzing from both friendly and opposing viewpoints. None of those attributes are at odds with his record as a senator.

    Mr. Kerry has continually chosen positions that allow him to utilize a staff of highly competent individuals that fill in where his abilities fall short. As an officer he was given tasks, provided with a talented and highly competent crew and proved an effective leader. I think the office of the President is comparable. As an elected official he would answer to The People. As President he would need all the above talents to deal with the Senate/House as well as Foreign affairs. Keep in mind: The President DOES NOT make laws. Individual Senators DO NOT make laws. The whole process of Legislative creativity, Executive approval and Judicial review makes the Laws. As a result, the initiative in creating Legislation is statistically less relevant to the Presidency than a record of analysis.

    In terms of needing impotus in Whitehouse-generated Legislation: John Edwards is the man who would create the legislation (He, after all is the talented Lawyer) and argue it in the Senate (votes to break any ties).
     
  14. IJ Reilly macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #14
    I'm not wildly impressed by Kerry's record in the Senate. It's underwhelming, to say the least. But it's also worth mentioning that having his name on more bills would not reduce the scrutiny of his record today, and might very well increase it. So it would be a mixed blessing for Kerry.

    I'd also point out again that George Bush had four years as president with a Congress controlled by his party to accomplish much of what he promises to accomplish in the next four. Now, that's a record worth questioning, too.
     
  15. zimv20 macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #15
    i can't tell if you have proof that kerry introduced zero or few (what are these few) bills, or if you've uncovered no evidence and have concluded that kerry introduced zero or few bills. which is it?
     
  16. stubeeef thread starter macrumors 68030

    stubeeef

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2004
    #16
    Check the link in the first post. :)
     
  17. stubeeef thread starter macrumors 68030

    stubeeef

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2004
    #17
    Please - he could have chosen the army they drafted him! (deferment denied)
     
  18. mischief macrumors 68030

    mischief

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2001
    Location:
    Santa Cruz Ca
    #18
    The deferment is irrelevant. He could have skipped the country or pulled more strings ( Air National Guard anyone?).

    If given the choice of enlisting to a Service at that point in history:

    Would you choose to be a drafted GI?

    Or would you choose a Service less likely to simply get you Accidentally Dead or Dismembered?

    Or would you get out of Dodge?

    Personally I think that owning up to a denied deferrment by choosing service rather than being subject to being ASSIGNED service shows courage.
     
  19. stubeeef thread starter macrumors 68030

    stubeeef

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2004
    #19
    I'll grant you most of your retort, but grant me this......what good is it to decry the deferments for cheney, when he applied for them himself? Jealousy perhaps?
     
  20. mischief macrumors 68030

    mischief

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2001
    Location:
    Santa Cruz Ca
    #20
    A simple matter of Ratio and Result:

    Kerry: 1 Deferment. Result: Navy.

    Cheney: 3 Deferments. Result?


    How can Jealousy enter the picture when I'm:

    Not old enough to have been eligible for the Draft between 1962 and 1972

    4F anyway

    Not a Democrat


    On Keery's Behalf (jealousy issue) I'd say it's a matter of honor. Kerry took his deferment denial in stride and chose service. Cheney continued to apply, using the processing time as a delay. I see Cheney's actions as cowardice.
     
  21. IJ Reilly macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #21
    No, once again: Rich man's war, poor man's fight. This is a classic situation, of which both Bush and Cheney are perfect examples.

    And that's why this issue remains relevant today. I would probably not be interested in discussing it at all, if it weren't for the fact that they got us into this war.
     
  22. stubeeef thread starter macrumors 68030

    stubeeef

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2004
    #22
    The rich man would have to be kerry out of these 3.

    Back to the subject, what about kerry inaction and ineffectual nature in 2 decades as an elected LEGISLATOR .
     
  23. stubeeef thread starter macrumors 68030

    stubeeef

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2004
    #23
    Mischief, I was refering to kerry being jealous, hence his anger toward cheney's success. Sorry I was not clear, did not mean you-meant kerry :eek:

    Can we not rehash this here, I would like to get to kerry's legislative past on this thread, we have been doing the draft dance in the other threads as well. We can and are continuing them there, so why the lack of progressive social benefiting legislature from mr kerry?
     
  24. mischief macrumors 68030

    mischief

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2001
    Location:
    Santa Cruz Ca
    #24
    I'll be more concise: Kerry seems to be more of a Leader by way of Management than by way of Innovation.

    In the current total situation I think that his style of careful consideration is more likely to be good for the nation than a more Zealous approach that may look more resolute without having the same consideration for consiquences.

    We need a Diplomat and a good Manager more than we need a Crusader and a Pragmatist.
     
  25. stubeeef thread starter macrumors 68030

    stubeeef

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2004
    #25
    So you concede a lacksadaisical 2 decades, but if not his ability to lead his cause on the senate floor/or committee, then the stuff before he was a senator is by default his qualification????? :confused:
     

Share This Page