Rebel GOP Senators
[Guest post by DRJ]
“Rebel” and “Senator” aren’t words you usually see together — unless you count John McCain’s claim to be a maverick — but Politico reports that could change after the November elections if candidates like Rand Paul and Sharron Angle are elected.
According to some former Senators quoted in the article, that’s not good because you can’t get anywhere in the Senate unless you try to get along. The exception was former GOP Tennessee Senator William Brock, who said it was refreshing and good for politics to see candidates who aren’t “there for a career but there because they care about what’s going on and want to make a difference.”
I’m with Brock, and I wonder if these true believers in government think it’s a good idea for BP to chose it’s Board of Directors based on how they get along together or who acts best at the yacht races. My guess is they’d be in favor of a few rebels there.
— DRJ
“Democratic stalwart” Frank Church. Is that the Frank Church who destroyed the CIA ? Yes, I think so.
George McGovern ? Is that the George McGovern who lost 49 states ? Yes, I believe it was. I think he is even the same guy who ran a B&B after he retired from politics and groused about the regulations on small business.
Jeremiah Denton was the senior officer among the POWs in Hanoi. Baker would be unlikely to appreciate Admiral Denton’s qualities.
Denton’s name first came to the attention of the American public in 1966, during a television interview arranged by the North Vietnamese in Hanoi. Prior to the interview, torture and threats of more torture were applied to intimidate him to “respond properly and politely.” His captors thought he was softened up sufficiently to give the North Vietnamese their propaganda line at the interview attended by important Communist officials from several countries and by Wilfred Birchett, an internationally known Communist author. During the interview, after the Japanese interviewer’s recitation of alleged U.S. “war atrocities,” Denton was asked about his support of U.S. policy concerning the war. He replied: “I don’t know what is happening now in Vietnam, because the only news sources I have are North Vietnamese, but whatever the position of my government is, I believe in it, I support it, and I will support it as long as I live.” The audience was aghast at his unexpected answer and the room went dead silent.
Without comment, the Vietnamese then renewed the rest of the interview which consisted of a free-flowing debate between Birchett and Denton..
Throughout the interview, while responding to questions and feigning sensitivity to harsh lighting, Denton blinked his eyes in Morse Code, repeatedly spelling out a covert message: “T-O-R-T-U-R-E”. The interview, which the Japanese journalist clandestinely took from Hanoi to Tokyo and sold to ABC was broadcast on American television on May 17, 1966, was the first confirmation that American POWs in Vietnam were being tortured.
Denton did not learn until his release that the interview had been shown in the U.S. And the Vietnamese had waited a week or so to punish him for his “misbehavior” at the interview. It was the worst torture session Denton endured during his time there, the guards assigned to two hour shifts watching the all-night torture each shed tears they could not hide.
Yes, I imagine Baker was pleased to see Denton leave the Senate.
Mike K (82f374) — 6/23/2010 @ 12:11 pmThank you for remembering and reminding, Mike K.
It must be scary for the power brokers to consider dealing with people who can’t be bought with political careers.
I know term limits comes with its own set of problems and is a very imperfect solution, but we need to do something about career politicians.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 6/23/2010 @ 12:19 pmSomeone, anyone, point me to the comity in the Senate since, say, January, 2001.
Comedy? lots. Comity? None.
Ed from SFV (f0e1cb) — 6/23/2010 @ 12:21 pmDustin: The only solution to career politicians is an electorate that is wise to their tricks. At the moment, we seem to have it.
And yes, fascinating info on Denton.
Sean P (4fde41) — 6/23/2010 @ 12:35 pmComity is defined as Republicans not bitching when Dems piss on the country, Ed.
JD (23a165) — 6/23/2010 @ 12:35 pmI really appreciate Politico’s heartfelt deep concern about the success of these politicians. It almost seems genuine.
If they were on the other side, would they be called Blue Dog Democrats or something?
daleyrocks (1d0d98) — 6/23/2010 @ 12:42 pmThe legislature can’t work if we have these rebel types? What if ALL the legislators were men and women of principle – people who went there because they passionately believed in something? What if they were ALL rebels?
That would look like our first congress.
Gesundheit (cfa313) — 6/23/2010 @ 1:13 pmIt will never happen, but term limits should be first on these candidate’s agendas if they win come election time. No better way to ensure that they won’t become career politicos and submit to the perks and benefits of Congress. Yeah, I’ve heard all the usual objections to this idea – we lose good people along the way, etc. – but tough nuts…the country needs a serious case of attitude adjustment.
Dmac (cfe27e) — 6/23/2010 @ 1:20 pmMartin is such a tool. The politicians that go to D.C. hoping to get on the best guest lists and score invitations to the WH to watch the Super Bowl deserve to join Bennett and Specter in retirement.
MU789 (959170) — 6/23/2010 @ 1:29 pmTerm limits will help. Career politicians represent themselves and not the people in their states or districts.
Term limits does introduce some additional problems and dangers but politicians who implement term limits will also be more willing to introduce laws to mitigate any problems associated with limits.
American need to reclaim our republic, NOW!
WarEagle (08c61f) — 6/23/2010 @ 2:43 pmI would like to know what is “crackpot” about ending the miserable 30-year reign of the Dept. of Education. It spends about $63 billion a year, and I defy anyone to prove that education has improved during that time.
Patricia (160852) — 6/23/2010 @ 4:44 pmI know term limits won’t completely solve the problem, but I think they would help a lot. We can’t keep sniping at imperfect solutions. One of the huge problems with our system is the deeply entrenched corruptocrats. Sure, there will be powerful organizations backing some hacks, but they will have to compete with at least some greater number of patriotic citizens who plan to return to reality after service.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 6/23/2010 @ 4:54 pmWould you want term limits for total number of terms, or total in a row? Say a senator does two terms, can’t do any more, next time around the public wants him back. Is that putting in enough of a hurdle to keep people in office in contact with their public?
MD in Philly (5a98ff) — 6/23/2010 @ 5:03 pmHope & Change:
AD - RtR/OS! (6f143b) — 6/23/2010 @ 5:06 pmRepeal the 16th & 17th Amendments;
Disband the Departments of Agriculture, Energy, Education, Commerce, Veterans Affairs, Housing and Urban Development …
Comment by MD in Philly — 6/23/2010 @ 5:03 pm
One interesting gimmick to the Term-Limits trend, is to allow termed-out pols to run, but only as a write-in, under the theory that if the voters truly want them that bad, they’ll go the extra mile to elect them.
AD - RtR/OS! (6f143b) — 6/23/2010 @ 5:08 pmComment by AD – RtR/OS
That’s a thought. (Keep the ACORN types away)
MD in Philly (5a98ff) — 6/23/2010 @ 5:10 pmAD’s proposal is also very good. The way we pick Senators now has effectively thwarted a major aspect of federalism.
but MD, if a former Senator had to run against a fresh incumbent, I could live with that. I can see some shady tricks, but that’s true of any solution.
Part of my thought is that some of these reps actually do need to spend time out of legislating and politicking. Let them start a business and meet a payroll or work at a corporation. The main problem is entrenched crooks, though.
In my ideal solution, the could serve X terms (more for the House), and then would have to spend time outside of office (or at least federal office) entirely for perhaps the same amount of time they were in office.
The idea of a career in politics, and nothing else, should be abandoned.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 6/23/2010 @ 5:11 pm“One interesting gimmick to the Term-Limits trend, is to allow termed-out pols to run, but only as a write-in, under the theory that if the voters truly want them that bad, they’ll go the extra mile to elect them.
Comment by AD – RtR/OS! — 6/23/2010 @ 5:08 pm ”
Nice!
Dustin (b54cdc) — 6/23/2010 @ 5:12 pmA return to part-time legislators, at all levels of government
AD - RtR/OS! (6f143b) — 6/23/2010 @ 5:15 pm(did you know that the Los Angeles City Council is the highest compensated city-council office in the land? $171648 + perks)
would do a lot to return us to the concept of the citizen-legislator.
In the age in which we live today, to run for office means you need to be almost perfect (as well as your family) and be willing to be lied about anyway, or have the kind of hide and connections it doesn’t matter how dark your soul is.
So while I agree with the idea to avoid entrenched politicians, there are not that many brilliant and courageous saints who will want to take a major office, so I would like to make it possible for the truly outstanding ones to stay there. (After so many terms, need 66% to win??- I don’t know).
I don’t see how any fed could be less than full time. Things are too complicated and specialized. I’m sure the established staffers and bureacrats can control the elected official unless they have the time and expertise to know who’s talking truth or nonsense to them.
In some ways the problem remains the same. The only real answer is to have men and women of character and integrity in positions of importance; but since we can’t guarantee that, we try things to enhance the likelihood that people of character will be the ones there.
MD in Philly (5a98ff) — 6/23/2010 @ 5:45 pmMD, I feel similarly, but our system is broken and until we find a better solution I think some form of term limits, be it your higher threshold (which would probably be unpopular if the guy with 55% lost to the guy with 45%) or mine or some other.
I suggest we consider that the these great leaders do not need to be in office if they are really so great.
They can do as Palin and Cheney and Romney are doing. They are all endorsing and advising others. Instead of power being more centralized, it is becoming more grassroots and ideas are competing instead of personalities.
So perhaps these superior leaders will actually be elevated rather than case aside. I’m honestly not sure, but I know we need a major fix.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 6/23/2010 @ 6:23 pmMD – I concur, but that almost perfect standard is only really applied to one side.
JD (23a165) — 6/23/2010 @ 7:19 pmActually, I’m all for rescinding the 17th Amendment. (I’m also all for absolute term limits.) If the 17th Amendment were rescinded, the states would regain much of their autonomy guaranteed by the 9th Amendment and lost to the courts over the decades. And Senators would not be senators-for-life like many are now.
John Hitchcock (9e8ad9) — 6/23/2010 @ 7:50 pmThis was meant as slam on team Reagan, but its also dead-on accurate when applied to the 2008 election and the Obama adminstration.
mike d (ed1389) — 6/23/2010 @ 8:25 pmVote for change on November 2, 2010. Vote these clowns out of office.
GeneralMalaise (c2b11b) — 6/23/2010 @ 8:35 pm“Rebel” and “Senator” aren’t words you usually see together …
DRJ? You’ve got a phone call on line 1, someone called… let me see if I’ve got this right… “Leia Organa Solo,” it says here.
Robin Munn (ad5965) — 6/23/2010 @ 9:19 pm