-
It's that time of year again - our ISP is asking for money. If you have some spare change, please click the Donate link... Thanks!
- About Us
- Search
- Need Help?
- Donate
- Login/Register
Latest Entries
Actions Menu
Blog Roll
- 4F Facebook Page
- Turn Up The Night with Kenny Pick
- Stephanie Miller Show
- The Tim Corrimal Show
- The Rachel Maddow Show
- Angry Americans with Paul Rieckhoff
- Thom Hartmann Program
- Turnips! Fans of Turn Up the Night Facebook Page
- Snopes.com
- Factcheck.org
- Official White House Page, if you must.
- The Brad Blog / Green News Report
- The Poorly Written Political Blog (Joe Santorsa)
A (D) No and (R) No are still 'No'.
Author: Raine
Date: 06/29/2009 12:32:22
This week, the House managed to pass what some would say is a landmark energy bill. Others have said it is just arranging the chairs on the deck. I happen to believe that this is a good bill and will create what has come to be known as green jobs. It's not perfect but I fully agree with Al Gore:
Now the bill will move one to Senate. An uphill battle to pass it will be waged for sure.
Interestingly enough, Dennis Kucinich voted no for this bill. Many have hailed him as being one of the straight shooters in Congress, and usually I agree with that sentiment, but this time, no. Politicians usually oppose a bill before the vote instead of after it, as Kucinich did. Instead he waited to oppose it only after he knew it had passed instead of working to defeat it. I find it disingenuous. In the end, people will not remember his vote as a protest vote, but just as a simple NO, next to a (D). A no vote from Dennis doesn't do anything different than a No vote from a blue Dog Dem or a Republican in the end.
At a certain point, ideology begins to hurt, and I believe this is starting to be the case here. One can make the case that climate change will not compromise, and I agree. That said, if we were to hold out for Mr. Kucinich's standards, we would have gotten nothing, and that is quite unacceptable. The cold hard reality is that politics is the art of compromise. In this case, Dennis Kucinich has shown himself to be as obstructionist as the Republicans -- only for all the right reasons. I know that 40 other Congresspeople voted against this bill, but it was Dennis's reasons that bothered me. I was loath to write about this today, because I know he is beloved among many of my progressive friends and often hailed as the one true liberal in the house. I am not arguing that he should abandon his principles here. What we need is less grandstanding after the vote and more working on getting it right before.
We need solutions now and we must start somewhere. Saying no after the fact doesn't do anything to help what needs fixing now. This bill is a start. It is a good start.
Besides -- The Boehner hated the bill -- how bad could it REALLY be?
:rofl:
:peace: and
Raine
“This bill isn’t the last word, but it needs to be the first word,” Gore said firmly. “It’s important to send a signal around the world that the U.S. is serious about climate change. Now is the time -- before world leaders gather in Copenhagen this December to begin to solve the climate crisis.”
Interestingly enough, Dennis Kucinich voted no for this bill.
“I oppose H.R. 2454, the American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009,” Kucinich stated in a press release. “The reason is simple. It won’t address the problem. In fact, it might make the problem worse.”
“It sets targets that are too weak, especially in the short term, and sets about meeting those targets through Enron-style accounting methods,” he continued. “It gives new life to one of the primary sources of the problem that should be on its way out — coal — by giving it record subsidies.”
At a certain point, ideology begins to hurt, and I believe this is starting to be the case here. One can make the case that climate change will not compromise, and I agree. That said, if we were to hold out for Mr. Kucinich's standards, we would have gotten nothing, and that is quite unacceptable. The cold hard reality is that politics is the art of compromise. In this case, Dennis Kucinich has shown himself to be as obstructionist as the Republicans -- only for all the right reasons. I know that 40 other Congresspeople voted against this bill, but it was Dennis's reasons that bothered me. I was loath to write about this today, because I know he is beloved among many of my progressive friends and often hailed as the one true liberal in the house. I am not arguing that he should abandon his principles here. What we need is less grandstanding after the vote and more working on getting it right before.
We need solutions now and we must start somewhere. Saying no after the fact doesn't do anything to help what needs fixing now. This bill is a start. It is a good start.
Besides -- The Boehner hated the bill -- how bad could it REALLY be?
:rofl:
:peace: and
Raine
