The U.S. Senate voted 85 to 13 today to confirm Condolezza Rice as President Bush's new secretary of state. The 13 who voted against her, and who actually held up the confirmation vote for several days, included 12 Democrats and independent James Jeffords of Vermont. They said they held up the confirmation vote and voted no today because Rice shares blame for mistakes and war deaths in Iraq.
In criticizing those dissenters this morning, Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., said they voted against Rice and held up her confirmation just because they were sore (election) losers, since everyone knew there were more than enough votes to confirm, including those of 30 Democrats.
The AP quotes McCain as saying: "So I wonder why we are starting this new Congress with a protracted debate about a foregone conclusion."
My take: This whole nation is founded on the notion of debate, protracted or not, about every conclusion, foregone or not. Non-violent political dissent at any time should be respected, encouraged and welcomed, even if inconvenient to those who know what the outcome will be. Such dissent is the only basis on which foregone conclusions can be changed, on which people of principle can oppose the tyranny of the majority, on which history can judge the wisdom of government action.
How do you see it?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
1 comment:
I think it's a foregone conclusion that your argument is correct. And anyone who debates that your argument isn't correct is so obviously wrong.
Post a Comment