*Ironic ain't it ?
After the auto bail out was squashed in the Senate the other night, soon to be resurrected by the Bush Administration, several thoughts have occurred to me.
First the vote itself. Columnist, editorials, politicians and of course union leaders are blasting the Republicans, particularly southern Republicans for killing the bail out. Ignoring of course the simple fact that polling data clearly shows that a majority of Americans in general oppose the auto bail out. But who listens to the American people any more if it does not fit your particular agenda.
But what I find interesting is the vote itself, 52-35. Now that Democrats will soon control both the legislature and executive branches we all know, or should know, how important that 60 vote majority is in the Senate. If you can't get 60 votes, you can't stop a filibuster and therefore you can't get anything done. But please note that only 87 Senators actually voted on this supposedly critical legislation, this vote that would save millions of jobs and stave off the next Great Depression. Who were these thirteen that did not think enough of the UAW....I mean the American auto industry to even participate? Well looking at it, it sure is ironic.
One Senator has a pass, or I should say former Senator, Barack Obama has resigned his seat in order to save the world come January and the Governor of Illinois has not received a high enough bid...I mean had enough time to announce his replacement, the holidays and all you know. That leaves twelve, who are they?
Let's start with the state of Massachusetts, that very blue state in the upper right corner, purported home of American liberalism and defenders of the American worker. Neither of the two Senators from the great state of Massachusetts voted, that would be John Kerry and...... drum roll Ted Kennedy. I'm not sure but I think Senator Kerry was on assignment for Obama to Poland saving the world from our breathe otherwise known as CO2. Either way the bluest of blue states took a pass on voting on this one, ironic ain't it?
Fortunately for balance, the upper left corner of our political map is solidly blue to balance the upper right. What Massachusetts is to New England, Oregon is to the West. In keeping with the Bay States example the Beaver State also did not participate . Of course one Senator, Smith is reported to be a Republican though I doubt many conservative Republicans consider him as one of their own. In fact come January he won't even be a Senator any longer. So we have two of the most liberal states in our country doing a no show for this vital vote, ironic ain't it?
Then there was the future Vice President from equally blue Delaware who chose not to participate in our rumored representative democracy. Obviously he must have been busy, we all know how busy Vice Presidents are, even the not yet sworn in ones. Either way both the future President and Vice President, could not or would not vote on this, ironic ain't it?
Putting the Republican Mr. Smith leaves Washington from Oregon aside, three prominent Democrats, all formerly Presidential candidates did not deem this important enough to vote on, but that still only adds up to 55, we need 5 more to save the working man. How about Harry Reid the Democrat's fearless leader? For procedural reasons he voted no, but if it was necessary to get to 60 he would have voted yeah for sure, so now we need just 4 Senators to save the world from Southern Republicans. Where will we find them?
How about the state of Montana? Remarkably they have two Democratic Senators, this traditionally red state is blue in the US Senate and guess what, they voted against the UAW, I mean the Big 3. As did the Democratic Senator Lincoln from the state of WalMar.., uh, Arkansas home of the Clintons, ironic ain't it?
So if Harry Reid could have gotten everyone on his side (Democrats) to either show up or vote to save the Union or is it union as in UAW, they would have been 1 vote (Barack Obama via Blago) short. Ironic ain't it?
This injustice of course is all the result of the dastardly Republicans who for some reason could not convince 10 of their member to vote to put working people out of work during the holidays. In fact 18 Republicans either did not vote, or voted for the bail out. Fully 37% of Republicans either through participation or abstinence (boy there is a contradiction of terms you could only find in politics), sided with the bail out, ironic ain't it?
The truth is that a few Republicans with an even fewer Democrats joined forces with a bunch of no show Senators to actually do the will of the majority of the American people, for now, ironic ain't it?