I had high hopes when Bill Frist was elevated to the Senate Majority Leadership. He seemed like an effective fiscal conservative who would erase the stain left by the Trent Lott fiasco.
Too bad those hopes weren't recognized. He has been a highly ineffectual leader who has allowed the Donk minority to dictate way too much of the Senate's business. The entire "nuclear option" thing was a non-starter because Frist didn't have the guts to play hard ball.
It's time for Frist to step down from the leadership and allow Mitch McConnell to take over. This stock situation, whether a true scandal or a media created one, is as good a reason as any. We risk losing two seats in '06 and need a leadership who will stand up to Senators Kennedy, Biden, Clinton and Boxer. Sadly, Frist is not that man.
Tuesday, October 18, 2005
Time for Bill Frist to Step Down
Sphere: Related Content
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
5 comments:
I think even if Frist were the worst Senate majority leader ever (which I certainly don't think he is) using a 'media created scandal' (or not caring if ia scandal is only media created or not) is a horrible path to take.
Punishing someone for one thing, only because you dislike something else they have done is just plain wrong.
Wrong Dave. Frist has been a so-so leader. He has to be removed and at least this issue gives cover.
Name one major issue that he has prevailed on. He has led the Senate through some of the most shameful spending increases in history. Congress is not a rubber stamp for the president and Frist should lead that way. He hasn't.
It's as old as politics. How many times have you heard the line "I'm stepping down to spend time with my family" by politicians who were involved in scandals?
I'm not punishing anyone, he will not be out of a job or money, he just won't be the Majority Leader anymore. It's not just "one thing", it's an accumulation of issues from the Terry Schiavo fiasco (and you as well as I know that Congress had no business being involved in that) to court nominees.
It's pretty simple, buddy, If a person is installed in a leadership position and they do not effectively lead in that position, they must be replaced.
"If a person is installed in a leadership position and they do not effectively lead in that position, they must be replaced."
I don't necessarily have a beef with that. We could argue on how good Frist is, I don't have a huge problem with him although I don't love him either. Better Frist than McCain for example.
What I take issue with is using a a media created scandal, where he did nothing wrong as the means to replace him. That is not a responsible way of handling things.
If Frist did wrong in the stock trades, we should expect the same result to happen to him whether or not we approve of his leadership ability.
Similarly, if we disapprove of his leadership ability, we should handle that without resorting to a fake scandal to give us cover.
My point was that with everything going on, I.E. Libby, Rove, Cheney, etc. we do not need another scandal in the Republican party.
Hammering away at Frist is just another thing for the media to use to slam us.
The majority of Americans do not stay as involved in current events as you and I, they get their snippets from CNN or local news and take it as gospel.
I'd be curious to see a poll showing Frist's favorable/unfavorable.
You said "Better Frist than McCain for example", but why should we settle for less than a great leader when we have a good-sized majority for perhaps only anoth year?
"The majority of Americans do not stay as involved in current events as you and I, they get their snippets from CNN or local news and take it as gospel."
So what we should take from this is that if CNN invents a scandal, whether proven or not, whether any wrong doing happened or not we should dump that person immediately? I don't think that is wise at all.
My hunch right now is that the whole Libby, Rove, Cheney thing will be much ado about nothing and will not even be a campaign issue. Same with DeLay (much as I personally dislike him.) The persecution complex might even help in turning out the base.
I am far from convinced that 2006 will be a disaster for Republicans. I don't see them losing more than a couple of Senate seats tops, and gains are about as likely at this point. The House probably won't change a lot either. 2008 will be a greater challenge I expect...
Post a Comment