Comments (18)

BlueInTexas wrote on September 26, 2007 5:13 PM:

Now that's what I'm talking about!

Let's hope he sticks to his guns and puts a hold on it to Baron von Spakovsky gets tossed.

mo2 wrote on September 26, 2007 5:28 PM:

Good for Obama.

Separate the von Spakovsky vote from other votes and force the Republicans to vote yes or no on voter suppression.

If Republicans won't allow a separate vote, then let the MSM explain to the public that Republicans are obstructing the work of the Senate in election season in a time of war. Republicans are wasting tax payer money by obstructing the work of Congress.

Redshift wrote on September 26, 2007 5:43 PM:

And if they can't succeed in getting the votes separated, vote 'em all down. And undermanned FEC will do less harm than a hostile and partisan one. As an old boss of mine used to say, "it's better to starve than eat poison."

oleeb wrote on September 26, 2007 5:43 PM:

Good for Obama! He's right on the mark with his statement.

Now, hopefully, Obama will use his influence to make damn sure this neofascist, racist scum doesn't get approved by the full Senate. It shouldn't take much for him to get Hillary and the other Senators running for President to join him in this effort.

dasher wrote on September 26, 2007 5:49 PM:

As far as I can see, this is another example of stirring rhetoric from Sen. Obama that is too late to actually do any good. Feinstein already knows that Nelson will vote for von Spakovsky, so unless ALL the rest of the Dems and two repugs vote against him ('cause you know Lieberman will vote for him) - a most unlikely scenario - he'll be confirmed.

The person, and the time, for Obama to show his off his verbal skills was: to Feinstein BEFORE she sold voting rights down the river and agreed to send the nomination to the floor.

So, nice speech Obama, but that's all it is.

BlueInTexas wrote on September 26, 2007 5:52 PM:

Redshift: "...And undermanned FEC will do less harm than a hostile and partisan one....."

Considering the recent history of the FEC, I agree with you 100%

Ben wrote on September 26, 2007 5:56 PM:

Good to see him sticking up for what's right; unfortunately he's only one Dem out of 100 senators, and since the wheels have fallen off the Democratic oversight bus I have a feeling this is going to be another drop in the giant "W's Corrupt Government" bucket.

How do you like my mixed metaphors?

SocraticGadfly wrote on September 26, 2007 6:25 PM:

Too bad that, with all his other rhetoric on Middle East-related issues, Obama couldn't be in the Senate to vote "no" on Lieberman-Kyl. Obama's been missing more and more Senate votes recently, it seems to me; one way to straddle or triangulate on issues.

Carolyn, Simi Valley, CA wrote on September 26, 2007 6:36 PM:

Hey Dasher, how do we know he didn't go to Feinstein? At least he has come out BEFORE the floor vote.
Ben, I like your mm's.

linda wrote on September 26, 2007 7:05 PM:

yeah, i agree with dasher. big freaking deal that he speaks now. it would have had more impact and could have signalled to feinstein that people are paying attention to this nasty appointee.

he's really a disappointment.

Mary wrote on September 26, 2007 7:10 PM:

He calls on Bush to send a new nominee or ... what?

That's the missing ingredient in almost all Dems (although kudos to Wyden on Rizzo).

If Obama has something to fill that blank - good for him and yeah rah even.

But I've used up way too many rounds of applause for blanks that were never filled where Dems are concerned.

Waiting to see [and what Redshift said on undermanned v. hostile]

Joe S. wrote on September 26, 2007 8:09 PM:

Dasher (and friends)
All is not lost. Democrats can use filibusters as well as Republicans. But will they?

nofltwlt wrote on September 26, 2007 8:13 PM:

I was wondering when someone would put a stop to this horrible horrible nominee.

Anonymous wrote on September 26, 2007 8:22 PM:

Some of you are just haters. The Dems can either vote to vote on all of the nominees separately or else they can just not confirm any of them for now, or they can send all of them back to committee (and kneecap Sen. Ben Nelson, who so richly deserves it for not taking the right position on something that won't matter one bit to Nebraska voters -- being from a red state is not a license to vote the wrong way on votes that won't affect you politically).

And it's not like Obama should have to tell Feinstein how to run her committee.

Also, where are the other candidates?

Ellen wrote on September 26, 2007 8:44 PM:

Wonder if Obama will bother to show up to vote?

I dunno. I almost hate to say anything for fear "our" guys will be so busy proving to the troglodyte right that they don't listen to their base that they will do exactly the opposite of what they should.

And why should I feel any differently? There are a few--Feingold, Waxman, Leahy--but the rest sit on their hands. We're like New Orleans looking for help from Brownie. It ain't coming, and it's too late to learn to buy a boat.

chard wrote on September 26, 2007 10:44 PM:

Joe S.

I'm not holding my breath on that one.

asdf wrote on September 27, 2007 10:08 AM:

We all know how this story will end.

There will be much Democratic grandstanding followed by a razor close vote which confirms the schmuck. The Democrats will claim this is yet another reason they need a super majority, because they can't do anything without one.

As for Obama, maybe Lieberman owes him a favor for all the support Obama gave him in Connecticut. Now would be the time to call him on it.

Julian Gonzalez wrote on October 8, 2007 1:28 PM:

I am glad is standing up, because I am beginning to think that he is just another woosy voice in the wind. If the Dems want my vote they need to find some guts/huevos/pants or something that makes them like they are in control. I am sick of people going to lie to them in every committee and nothing happens to the liars. They just sit there and get mouthy but there is no consequences for the bush liars.
Can someone disagree with me.