Disappointment with Senator McCaskill
Submitted by KCChieffan on Sat, 01/26/2008 - 12:53am.
I am disappointed with some of Senator McCaskill's votes. She has voted to fund the war while she says that she opposes it. The only way to end this disastrous war is to cut funding, and she is one of many Democrats who are not willing to bite the bullet and oppose this criminal occupation of Iraq.
The issue that really "irks" me, though, is FISA. She voted to extend FISA in 2007, thus giving support to this president breaking the law. When I wrote her about it, she stated that the national defense was her main concern, and that a terror threat to the capitol had been made. This threat was later found to be false. Again, Bush got his way through fear. It is so disgusting, but he always wins when he does this.
Now, in 2008, she was one of a few Democrats to support the bill that provides amnesty to the telecommunications industry for their illegal wiretapping. In spite of a vast majority of the country opposing this amnesty, Ms. McCaskill votes for it. Again, she is one of many providing this president protection for his lawlessness.
I will be hard pressed to support Ms. McCaskill during the primary in 2012 (a long way off, but I do not forget). She was elected in 2006 due to unhappiness with the war in Iraq and the direction that the country was going under Bush and the GOP. Unfortunately, many of her votes do not reflect this unhappiness of the electorate. It is time for the people to hold this president and Congress accountable for their actions.
It is sad to say that Ms. McCaskill is one who may have to answer for many of her votes.
»
- KCChieffan's blog
- Login or register to post comments
- Printer friendly version
Just a reminder...
...that the views expressed here do not necessarily reflect those of FiredUp! Missouri creators and/or administrators.
Like many of us here, I worked hard to help elect Claire to the United States Senate in 2006. I'm proud that she's there --even if I don't agree with every last one of her votes-- because having her in Washington means that the world looks at least a little bit better than it would if we still had Jim Talent casting votes.
Does this mean that we don't have the right to be disappointed from time to time? Of course not. What it does mean is that we'd be foolish to let the perfect be the enemy of the good. After all, each of us have our own definition of "perfect." Asking anyone to comply with that standard is asking the impossible.
[Comments in this thread are now closed. Thanks.]
Cutting Funding Might Not Help
It was my last vote for Claire, for anything!
Their votes
Don't feel alone, the Democrats were elected to end the war, instead they line up and kiss George Bush's rearend. That may not be an appropriate comment for this forum, but its exactly the way I feel. The leadership of Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid is about as sorry as any I have seen in my democratic lifetime. It is easy to end the war, just don't vote to fund it any longer. Tell the Cowboy when you spend this money, your war is over. Perhaps you should make plans to bring the troops home with what money you have left, or they may have to hitch-hike.
Pelosi and Reid are both mealymouth smiling supporters of George Bush. They should both resign and get out of dodge.
The upcoming election is ours to lose, and the way things are going, we can very well lose it.
The democrats are against the war, but will vote for every single issue this president wants. No wonder the american people have so little confidence in our government. Say one thing and do just the opposite.
Senator McCaskill