Sen Schumer is in the bullseye (is he really a republican?)

[donsu]

http://www.newsday.com/news/local/state/ny-bc-ny--schumer-electoral0106jan06,0,2540056.story?coll=ny-region-apnewyork

Schumer: Democrats shouldn't protest Bush win

-snip-


"My view is that you don't hold up the election unless there is concrete real evidence of fraud. I haven't seen that," Schumer said Thursday.

-snip-

"Chuck certainly thinks that the problems our nation has in voting are worth two hours of the Senate's attention, but he doesn't believe we should stop the certification of the election for that purpose, and every senator except Senator Boxer agreed with him," said Schumer spokesman Stu Loeser.

-snip-

In the House, three New York City Democrats, Reps. Anthony Weiner, Jose Serrano, and Major Owens, had supported the initial Ohio objection. Of those three, only Owens still voted against the election results after the debate, as did Rep. Maurice Hinchey, who represents the Hudson Valley.

Upstate Republican Thomas Reynolds, R-Clarence, ripped Democrats for making a stink in the quadrennial electoral ritual.
(well, now we know which of the new ones are cowards/faux dems)
-----------------------------


we see you Schumer...we know

[DireStrike]

1. I'll be calling his office.

What a dick. He's putting his political aspirations ahead of the party.

[AP]

4. What political aspirations?

To win elections for Democratic congressional candidates?

You know he decided not to run for NY governor.

[IrateCitizen]

6. A common political joke in NY state...

... is that the most dangerous place in America to be is between Charles Schumer and a television camera.

Please read my post #5, below, for the thoughts of one of his constituents.

[AP]

20. so they say that while they're copying his sunday press conferences?

Politicians who want to get reelected are all copying Schumer's techniques.

Meanwhile, DU'ers are criticizing them.

[IrateCitizen]

22. And they'd be absolutely right to copy that particular strategy.

Schumer maintains an EXTREMELY high visibility in NY State. If you read my other posts on this thread, you'd see that I don't consider egotistical grandstanding to be 100% of a liability. It can certainly be a strength in certain situations. ALL highly successful politicians are egotists at heart, and are quite adept at grandstanding to further their own image and career.

However, as a constituent on Charles Schumer and a resident of NY State, I have to say that although I much prefer him to our junior Senator (who is even MORE of an egotist, IMHO), and although I acknowledge that he is pretty much a dependable liberal in today's political world, he often leaves me wanting so much more. He just presents a strategy that is too much about "going along to get along", when the stiff opposition from the other side of the aisle has no interest in neither going nor getting along. His tactics serve to win a few battles here and there, while leading to ultimate defeat in the overall war, IMHO.

[AP]

26. You have to be in it to win it, and Schumer is showing Democrats how

to be in it by winning elections.

Which policy positions of his don't you like?

[IrateCitizen]

29. I find his unconditional support of Israel to be abhorrent...

I also took a big issue with him on his vote in favor of the Iraq War Resolution. His stance on gun control (he and DiFi would almost literally like to melt down all firearms in private ownership in the US) to be a huge liability. He has stood up in defense of torture being allowable under certain circumstances. This is just off the top of my head.

I'll readily admit that he's a liberal, but he's no populist nor progressive. Then again, NY is in short supply of anyone approaching populist or progressive past a few US Representatives.

[AP]

2. Here we go again.

Yes. Schumer is a Republican. That's why he ran as a Democrat. That's why he was one of the most effective voices of opposition to the Republican witch hunt from 98-2000.

Yes. He's a Republican.

[youngred]

3. In the Senate only Boxer voted in favour

though most Dems spoke in favour. He may be wrong about this but that doesn't make him a closet republican. Schumer is a very good and liberal Senator, even if he isn't 100% to my liking no one will be

[IrateCitizen]

5. He's not a Republican, but he is a self-serving grandstander...

He's my senior Senator, and I have to say that although I like him much more than my junior Senator, he regularly leaves me wanting much, much more.

Schumer craves the limelight more than anything else. The Democrats who get the limelight seem to primarily be those who believe in the "go along to get along" philosophy. There's no going nor getting along with this bunch of Republicans. Although I'm sure that Chuck means well in pursuing his limitless ambition, his methods will be the death-knell of the Democratic Party.

[shance]

8. Wouldnt that make him a Republican?

Looks like a duck....quacks like a duck.

Just because someone calls themselves a Dem, doesnt mean they have actually earned the title.

[IrateCitizen]

10. No, that would make him an ambitious politician

Bill Clinton could be described as a self-aggrandizing grandstander as well. It was also a great strength of his from time to time as well.

Do you still labor under the idea that most politicians go into "public service" because they want to give back, or out of some altruistic motivation? Many go into politics because they're egomaniacs, plain and simple. They crave attention and power. They may have other noble callings as well, at first -- but too often those more noble impulses are subordinated to the desire to maintain power and privilege.

Chuck Schumer is no different than the majority of his fellow Senators from both sides of the aisle, in this instance.

[shance]

23. Then from what Im reading you are saying

that ambition essentially cannot coexist with ethics and that most of our leaders are egomaniacs minus a moral compass. I would agree with you on the egomaniac part but I believe ethics MUST be a part of the political process or a civilization will ultimately destroy itself, like we are doing right now.

However that it should not be the norm to have a bunch of wealthy white males making all the laws that benefit themselves and are hurting most Americans. That aint normal, or I should say, its not healthy. It's not Democracy and its not representative of the rich diversity that encompasses this country.

Again, just because someone says they are something doesnt mean they ARE. Dick Cheney may describe himself as a moral, kind nice guy. That does not make him one.

However, I believe it is our hobbled capitalistic system that has been unfairly exploited and used by corporations and monopoliies that in my opinion has created the lack of ethics and the rewarding of unethical behavior. Washington has been allowed to consume all the power from the states and local governments and that must change. Its going to take a revolution. The sooner Americans grasp that fact, the less blood to be shed.

[IrateCitizen]

28. Ambition and desire for recognition are basic human nature...

All people operate on some sort of moral compass -- even Dick Cheney. Of course, the bearings of some of these moral compasses might disgust you or I, but they operate according to that compass nonetheless.

But more importantly, all people desire recognition and/or a sense of importance. What they go about doing to achieve that is largely dictated by the norms of society.

In many Native American societies, people gained standing and recognition through altruism. That is why gift-giving was so important in Native cultures. Also, age was associated with wisdom, which provided recognition. This is why the older members of the tribe were the most respected.

In our society, recognition is based on the amassing of power. In many instances, with this power comes extreme wealth, but not always. For instance, a powerball lottery winner may have more money than a US Senator, but that US Senator has much more power -- and the privilege that goes along with it.

That power has a funny effect on people. It is the rare person who can achieve significant power and not have it affect his or her moral compass in any significant way. For most people, achieving power propels them to compromise their moral principles in order to hold onto it. The human mind is an amazing rationalizer -- it can explain away just about any moral transgression under the guise of working toward a greater good. In this instance, it allows politicians like Chuck Schumer to engage in actions that violate their moral compass, because they can explain it away to themselves as being necessary to maintain their power and privilege -- and therefore enable them to continue doing so much good in OTHER areas.

[DireStrike]

14. Exactly.

I'm a NYer too, if that adds any weight to my opinion.

I think he wants to be President one day.

[PATRICK]

15. He had two choices

Like others with a strong plurality(bipartisan victory) in their own re-election he had a choice. Go for keeping the crossovers happy as a winning formula and join Smoking Joe and the DLC as the model for becoming a presidential candidate- or use his political capital for daring populist causes.

Largely he chose the former, not calculating IMHO that it just cost him any slim chance he had in getting on the ticket except as a dark horse veep- but who would need a New Yorker per se? My guess is he does not understand the depths of what he lost by not taking the gamble- and others- in doing the demonstrably right thing(another honest miscalculation I think).

He hurts the party more than himself and the nation more than the party in this blind wisdom. Would he even recognize the e-voting truck hurtling down the road even now in his current secure position? I don't think that either.

If we can't educate this kind of ignorance among otherwise reputable and liberal Democrats obviously education has to take a different form. Apparently the main form a pol understands is being beaten on the head politically or else it will be by respected lobbyists and media deities, or the oxymoronic DLC. No, they will not necessarily come to prudent conclusions by their own professional research. Ordinary people storming their ear canals is all to often the only way to nudge them away from obvious disaster. And pols sitting pretty- for now- don't have to be bothered much by the pesterings of their individual voters.

There is a huge divide between those with ANY conception of the depth of organized vote fraud and those behind the learning curve. Those behind the learning curve will never like to admit their mistake and will have a tough time framing the issue forthrightly.

In regards to election reform, as an organization compared to the GOP, the Democratic Party is electorally retarded, and will keep repeating the same self-hurting actions beyond the ability of reasonable people to comprehend. The flickers of reason are too little and always too late and any promise to do better is still at the bottom of a very large mountain upon which squat RW extremists.

[KlatooBNikto]

7. Unless we realize that there is a sideshow involving the PNAC cabal

which has erased the distinctions between the Democrats and Republicans we are going to be fooled by the likes of Schumer, Clinton and others. Their loyalty is to the major aims of the PNAC document and this is why they voted for the Iraq War Resolution,turning a blind eye to the 9/11 disaster, keeping their silence on the Abu Ghraib tortures and now supporting the nomination of Alberto Gonzalez, the Chief Consigliere of the Bush Administration.

In fact, I believe that people like Schumer believe that Bush will execute the policies of the PNAC in the Middle East better than Democrats.This is why he wants us to be silent on Ohio.

[shance]

24. BINGO***

n/t

[PallasAthena]

9. But did you hear him pummel Gonzales yesterday?

I have NO idea why there was only ONE senator (Boxer) who was able to stand up to the suspicious goings-on in Ohio, but taking it out on Schumer lets all the other Dems (and Kerry??????) who said similar things {or nothing) off the hook. I've heard him stand up for the correct position on many things. (and I'm not a New Yorker....... I am grateful that my state, Illinois, now has TWO (count 'em, two) good senators (Durbin and Obama))

[DireStrike]

17. Even * does the right thing sometimes.

One monkey at one typewriter with a thousand media channels spinning their wheels until they smoke...

[madrchsod]

18. you must not have been here yesterday

it was obama was/is a traitor, a sell out to the bush people,and what ever else you can think of. yes we have one very good senator and one who just might make it. but remember carol,we had high hopes for her but that didn`t work out.

[PallasAthena]

33. Uh oh! I must have missed it. What did he (Obama) do??

[shance]

25. So what constructive result came from a bunch of posturing words?

He was confirmed.

Words are as cheap as dirt.

[PallasAthena]

32. The confirmation was a "fait accompli," but in this strange era of silent

Democrats, those who are afraid (and Lord knows why.....they have nothing left to lose!)...... it is important that someone should
at least SPEAK UP! Better that (someone, some time in history will note all this....it's the most we can hope for right now, I'm afraid) than NOTHING!

[newyawker99]

34. Hi PallasAthena!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[PallasAthena]

35. Thank you so much! I'm glad to be here.

[kerry-is-my-prez]

11. He used to be good - He's gone downhill ever since Hillary came along.

I don't know why.

[donsu]

12. ha ha ha ha ha ha ha

nt

[madrchsod]

13. obama yesterday

schumer today
who will it be tomorrow?

[DireStrike]

16. Obama didn't deserve it - Schumer does.

HE is the one dividing himself from us, not the other way around. Comments like his allow the R's to paint the views of the majority of our party as kooky and fringe.

[AG78]

19. He's watching out for us

http://www.defenddemocracy.org/biographies/biographies.htm

Along with James Woolsey, Charles Krauthammer, Bill Kristol, Cliff May, Newt Gingrich, Zell Miller, Gary Bauer, Richerd Perle, JD Hayworth, and Frank Gaffney.

[JI7]

21. no, he is not a Republican

[DemGirl7]

27. good to know that my Rep. (Hinchey D-NY)voted against the election results

I think I'm going to write him a thank you letter.

[IrateCitizen]

30. I can't wait to have Hinchey as my Rep when I move to New Paltz...

Right now I'm stuck with DeLay sycophant Sue Kelly. :puke:

[DemGirl7]

31. I used to be represented by Sue Kelly...

by since they redistricted, where I live...the city of Poughkeepsie is now represented by Hinchey, plus I go to college in New Paltz...so I'm well represented by him.

[BurtWorm]

36. Schumer clearly doesn't get it.

He clearly does not understand what a threat these people are to democracy. And if he doesn't get it, I have to assume he doesn't care.