Sen. Murkowski yesterday displayed bad judgment in my opinion; but if this report is true and she follows through with it, she'll show class today. Showing class is not nothing.
I see, she's going to pair her vote with Daines so he can stay at his daughter's wedding, and she promises to vote "present."
Get ready for someone to try to spin the total number of yes votes to look lower, thus demonstrating that Kavanaugh didn't really reflect the will of whatever.
I can reconcile those opposing currents. A vote can demonstrate a higher level of integrity than its opposite, while being cast in such a way and at a such a time as to diminish any inference of courage or probity, and while being susceptible of a crass and predictable interpretation later, all at the same time. If Murkowski never gives into the temptation to say "but I didn't actually vote no" a la John ("I was for the war before I was against it") Kerry, that will reflect well on her, but her "no" on cloture will dog her, and rightly so, forever.
I hope she's toast, but then I've wanted her gone for a long time. Collins did well yesterday, but I still want her gone the moment we find we can do better. I would have said I wanted Graham gone. I'm actually willing to wait and see a bit on that one. I have to accept that there are issues I can't trust him on, while believing that on the whole he's contribute to the good.
Palin has already signaled, "Hey, Lisa Murkowski, I can see the 2022 election from my house," and Laura Ingraham is making similar noises. Palin unfortunately pretty much burned her bridges with me by resigning as Governor, even though I have little doubt I'd prefer her voting pattern to Murkowski's. In the age of Trump, would voters give Palin a second chance? Would the media dumpster fire be extinguished this time? I'm not sure any more.
I’d vote for Palin. If Lindsey Graham can come back, she surely could. She always wanted to, but ten years ago there was no support for fighting back. She tried, but the right turned away and she finally was shamed into retreat. That’s all changed.
This makes me nervous. It means that if Manchin changes to a "No" and Murkowski does not pair with Daines, the vote will be 50-48 against. In other words, I have to trust that a Democrat and/or an anti-Kavanaugh Republican will follow through on what they've said they'll do. The events of the last 20 days have made me less likely to do so.
Also, for what it's worth, a writer at NRO says Murkowski pairing is not the same as her voting "Present". If Murkowski votes "Present", it counts as a vote; There will be 99 people voting and Kavanaugh will need 50 "Yes" votes; i.e, he must have Manchin. I imagine the pressure on both Manchin and Murkowski will be fierce.
(Somewhat of a side note: I'm still hopeful some Democrats will cross over and vote for Kavanaugh. That seems to me to be the only hope of even beginning to heal the damage that's been done.)
As for Palin, my understanding is that she resigned as Governor because the constant lawsuits against her were harming Alaska itself. Yes, I wish she'd stayed and fought but as Grim says there was no support for her. In other words, if she'd tried to pull a Kavanaugh on her tormentors she would not have found a Graham to line up with her.
I'll add my own bit of cynicism to Murkowski's projection, and it comes against the backdrop of her meandering rationalization of her No on cloture, a speech in which spent interminable time wallowing in the agony of her decision to vote no.
Murkowski is attempting to dilute that No vote with a Present vote because she's hearing election footsteps, whether from Palin or softer padding by others.
Well, in the end, victory is the most honorable thing. Since she assisted in the victory, and let a man attend his daughter's wedding into the bargain, I'll call her action worthy in its way.
I give her huge credit for being a colleague he knew he could count on to carry out such an agreement. She's not adopting the "by any means necessary" credo.
15 comments:
I think she's being pretty open about voting no on confirmation. But maybe she'll change her mind.
CNN and The Hill have the same story, for whatever that's worth.
https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/409887-murkowski-to-vote-no-on-kavanaugh
https://www.cnn.com/2018/10/05/politics/lisa-murkowski-senate-vote-present-kavanaugh/index.html
I see, she's going to pair her vote with Daines so he can stay at his daughter's wedding, and she promises to vote "present."
Get ready for someone to try to spin the total number of yes votes to look lower, thus demonstrating that Kavanaugh didn't really reflect the will of whatever.
That's already come up in the comments, unsurprisingly.
From the Hill "Murkowski announced her decision hours after it became clear that Kavanaugh had enough votes to be confirmed."
Eh, I don't know that this shows that much class. Like Manchin announcing after Collins confirmed her Yes, her vote is meaningless.
Either ‘this non-yes will be spun to make him look less legitimate” or “Manchin’s yes and this move are meaningless” can be true. Both can’t be.
I can reconcile those opposing currents. A vote can demonstrate a higher level of integrity than its opposite, while being cast in such a way and at a such a time as to diminish any inference of courage or probity, and while being susceptible of a crass and predictable interpretation later, all at the same time. If Murkowski never gives into the temptation to say "but I didn't actually vote no" a la John ("I was for the war before I was against it") Kerry, that will reflect well on her, but her "no" on cloture will dog her, and rightly so, forever.
I hope she's toast, but then I've wanted her gone for a long time. Collins did well yesterday, but I still want her gone the moment we find we can do better. I would have said I wanted Graham gone. I'm actually willing to wait and see a bit on that one. I have to accept that there are issues I can't trust him on, while believing that on the whole he's contribute to the good.
Palin has already signaled, "Hey, Lisa Murkowski, I can see the 2022 election from my house," and Laura Ingraham is making similar noises. Palin unfortunately pretty much burned her bridges with me by resigning as Governor, even though I have little doubt I'd prefer her voting pattern to Murkowski's. In the age of Trump, would voters give Palin a second chance? Would the media dumpster fire be extinguished this time? I'm not sure any more.
I’d vote for Palin. If Lindsey Graham can come back, she surely could. She always wanted to, but ten years ago there was no support for fighting back. She tried, but the right turned away and she finally was shamed into retreat. That’s all changed.
This makes me nervous. It means that if Manchin changes to a "No" and Murkowski does not pair with Daines, the vote will be 50-48 against. In other words, I have to trust that a Democrat and/or an anti-Kavanaugh Republican will follow through on what they've said they'll do. The events of the last 20 days have made me less likely to do so.
Also, for what it's worth, a writer at NRO says Murkowski pairing is not the same as her voting "Present". If Murkowski votes "Present", it counts as a vote; There will be 99 people voting and Kavanaugh will need 50 "Yes" votes; i.e, he must have Manchin. I imagine the pressure on both Manchin and Murkowski will be fierce.
(Somewhat of a side note: I'm still hopeful some Democrats will cross over and vote for Kavanaugh. That seems to me to be the only hope of even beginning to heal the damage that's been done.)
As for Palin, my understanding is that she resigned as Governor because the constant lawsuits against her were harming Alaska itself. Yes, I wish she'd stayed and fought but as Grim says there was no support for her. In other words, if she'd tried to pull a Kavanaugh on her tormentors she would not have found a Graham to line up with her.
I'll add my own bit of cynicism to Murkowski's projection, and it comes against the backdrop of her meandering rationalization of her No on cloture, a speech in which spent interminable time wallowing in the agony of her decision to vote no.
Murkowski is attempting to dilute that No vote with a Present vote because she's hearing election footsteps, whether from Palin or softer padding by others.
Eric Hines
All done, vote finished, 50-48.
One of the times I love being wrong.
What will be spun is 50 Yes votes, not how the individual Senators who voted.
Well, in the end, victory is the most honorable thing. Since she assisted in the victory, and let a man attend his daughter's wedding into the bargain, I'll call her action worthy in its way.
But Sarah Palin 2022.
I give her huge credit for being a colleague he knew he could count on to carry out such an agreement. She's not adopting the "by any means necessary" credo.
Post a Comment