Filibuster and other news

First, to any who haven't heard, I picked my husband up from the Modesto hospital this afternoon. He seems to be feeling better and we'll follow up with the cardiologist there at least one more time before they transfer his case back here. We still don't know what happened. Meantime I'll try to keep his life as stress free as possible around here. I'm very glad to have him safely at home.

Thanks to all of you who expressed their concern. We seem to be over the hump for now.

second, I didn't in any way mean to imply that the people who comment here weren't doing everything possible. We wouldn't be here if we weren't concerned. When I read that post after a little sleep, it sounded like I was scolding. Not on your life. I know how much we all do. I think I was just frustrated and angry compounded with the personal turmoil.

I came in from Modesto, everything was under control, and I went to sleep. Didn't check the news except for headlines (breaking news) or any of the things I usually try to at least glance at. The world could keep spinning without me for a little while, hard as it is for me to believe that sometimes.

I've taken a quick look back now but haven't made the blog rounds. That may happen tomorrow. I did read the comments here; especially both of epm's. Well thought out, as always.

My personal sentiments are closer to those expressed in this Nation article today but I understand the other point of view as well.

I'm not sure that we will ever find an ideal spokesperson. The slash and burn/take no prisoners attitude of Rove and his henchmen will be in full spin no matter who steps up. They do it to their own; they did it to Senator Kerry and Howard Dean; they've tried with Harry Reid whose personal life is above reproach so far as I know. He's a Mormon, for heaven's sake. The gang in power is desperate to stay there. They have no moral values, no sense of decency, and if they have a conscience, I certainly haven't seen it. It's all about power and they're willing to do anything.

I keep running over the list in my head. We would need someone with enough seniority to be credible and with a clean enough personal slate to be beyond personal attacks. My senior Senator would qualify; she's certainly centrist. Senator Feinstein sits on Judiciary. She had been considered as a vice-presidential candidate years ago (it went to Ferraro instead). Unfortunately, she sometimes bends over backward so far to get along that I'm never sure which way she's going to jump. She's supported some issues like the flag burning amendment which have appalled me (and I told her so).

Diane pushed through a gun control measure years ago when she was Mayor of San Francisco (right after the assassinations of Mayor Moscone and Supervisor Harvey Milk). She was very nearly recalled in "liberal" San Francisco. She ran for Governor here and lost (barely - it was close) to one of the "law and order" candidates. Much has changed since the San Francisco days, the recall attempt, and that close election. She's modified many of her liberal views; possibly in an attempt to hold our center. She's a much better Senator than any who have run against her would have been and I don't think even California would elect a second Barbara Boxer. I'm just not too sure she'd be willing to lead the charge.

I think she's probably the most respected of the Democratic women in the Senate, including Hillary Clinton. If there's anyone else, they don't spring to mind. I don't know yet what she'll do - I almost never do. Of the men, we have some good newcomers but they haven't established a track record.

That pretty much leaves us back with Kerry and Kennedy.

As far as the filibuster is concerned, I hear what epm is saying about appealing to our broad base. I think that's what the three (at least) who are planning to vote for the nomination are trying to do. I think they're mistaken - I'm not sure we can find common ground with many of these issues. I'd be delighted to be proven wrong.

If it were possible to win over the broad base, do we want to roll over and play dead? We need to stand for something and we need to decide what that something is going to be. I don't think "go along to get along" will work and if it did, what price would the country pay in the long run.

I honestly don't know. As "worried" says, I'm the flaming liberal activist from California but not so "flaming" that I'm unwilling to listen.

Take care everybody.

Ann