Chicago Sun-Times: Anit-war Obama opposes Gonzales

[Tweed]

http://www.suntimes.com/output/elect/cst-nws-sweet04.html

"Last week, the Illinois Democratic senators split over confirming Condoleezza Rice for secretary of state. Sen. Dick Durbin said no and Sen. Barack Obama said yes.

Thursday, both senators voted against President Bush's nominee for attorney general, Alberto Gonzales, who was confirmed on a 60-36 roll call. Voting "yes'' were six Democrats and 54 Republicans; voting "no'' were 35 Democrats and an independent.

These two nominations have in common the selection by Bush for his cabinet architects of some of the administration's most controversial strategies: Rice, regarding the Iraq war, and Gonzales, policies that opened the door to the detention and torture of prisoners suspected of being connected to terrorist activities.

Durbin's lack of support for Gonzales, the White House counsel, was telegraphed when he voted against his confirmation in the Judiciary Committee, of which he is a member. From the Senate floor, Durbin said, "At the very least, Mr. Gonzales helped to create a permissive environment that made it more likely that abuses would take place.''"

Well at least Mr. Obama got this one right. What a fine leader Durbin is.

[madrchsod]

1. the difference between obama and durbin

are the years of service the kid is young and not very polished yet but it takes years to get to be a great senator. remember illinois has had great democratic and republican senators over the last 50 years, i think obama may join them. he may become your generation`s legend.

[seventythree]

2. doesn't it make you wonder

if Obama's voting for Rice was a black thing? I mean, you would have not had the Gonzales' memo with its Abu Ghraib after effects, had you not had the war? But if it was a black thing, when why didn't he stand up for the thousands of disenfranchised African Americans in Ohio and elsewhere?

[seventythree]

3. an after thought

-- maybe those angry letters from DU'ers influenced his vote. Or, being a real cynic here, he needs a caucus vote to stand behind, first.

[grace0418]

4. I did wonder if he wasn't looking ahead to a possible run

I could be way off BUT, if he decides to run for President in 2008 or 2012 or whenever, he's going to have to get more support in the red states. Obviously, being a democrat and a black man, he's not going to be popular amongst the super-right-wing-racist-assholes (i.e. Bush supporters). So he's going to have to make up some of the votes Kerry DIDN'T get from super-religious blacks in the red state. Obviously, even though his position on abortion and on civil rights for gay couples are similar to Kerry's, he'll make up some of those votes by virtue of his heritage. So I wondered if he felt that voting against Condi (who IMHO is a good ole boy in the body of a black woman) would be a mistake when trying to build support among blacks who would only vote for him based on race. Does that make sense to anyone else?

[seventythree]

5. explanation?

Gonzales did not "show an ability to speak with responsible moral clarity."

This is from Lynn Sweet's column -- Sun Times, I believe. Here Obama is explaining why he didn't vote for Gonzales and said that the President and Condi deserved the benefit of the doubt. I think we have more than one thing coming from the Kerry playbook, and I was a Kerry supporter from the get go and a constant defender. But..... if this isn't the old straddle the fence. Obama is a lawyer and while we can disagree, Gonzales' memo wasn't without cogent legal argument, imo. So Condi and the President can put together their own intell, hide contrary thought and they should get the benefit of the doubt, but Gonzales, who was doing a job for a client, writing an opinion which can be defended, even if we don't like the ultimate ramification or could argue it differently, lacks moral clarity. Give me a break -- Obama has said he thinks it is most important to do the best job you can in the job you are in. I agree. If he thinks, looking ahead, that he would lose blacks because he voted against Condi, I think he is wrong. To the extent they would support Condi, no matter what, because she is black, is the extent to which they would support him, no matter what, because he is. The only thing he could have hoped to gain is maybe some goodies for Illinois from the President, but that was cancelled by Durbin and by the Gonzales' vote. His answers do not tell us much of anything, imo, and I remain disappointed.