Massachusetts Senator Ed Markey, who is at least temporarily filling John Kerry’s seat in the U.S. Senate, listened to the testimony and questioning regarding President Obama’s embarrassing plan to attack Syria just enough to kill a few people and be annoying (to prove he really, really meant what he said about that red line), and then cast his vote on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee’s compromise resolution approving the attack as “present.” Why? Well…
1. He’s a long-time Democratic loyalist from the House, and would no more oppose a Democratic president than fly…
2. He’s from peacenik Massachusetts (just like me!), and he knows that in the only state to give George McGovern its electoral votes, voting to drop missiles on foreign land that haven’t attacked us first is very unpopular, and…
3. He’s a lily-livered coward and a disgrace to his state.
Markey is also a liar, as his ridiculous “explanation” for his abdication of responsibility shows:
“Before casting such a monumental vote, I need to review all of the relevant classified materials relating to this matter before I make a decision as important as authorizing the use of military force. The people of Massachusetts expect their representatives to have analyzed all of the facts prior to making a decision of this magnitude. I am concerned about the unintended consequences of a U.S. military attack on Syria and the potential that such a strike could lead, over time, to the entanglement of our brave service men and women in an intractable Syrian civil war. The resolution as currently drafted contains language that could be interpreted as expanding the scope of the U.S. military action beyond merely the degradation and deterrence of Assad’s chemical weapons capability. The current version of the resolution goes beyond the President’s objective of responding to the use of chemical weapons to call for a broader U.S. political and military strategy in Syria that includes expanded support for various opposition groups, efforts to limit support for the Syrian regime from the Government of Iran and activities to isolate terrorist groups in Syria. Although some of these may be desirable objectives, as written they could result in deeper U.S. military involvement in a country inflamed by sectarian violence. In the days to come, I will further examine the classified intelligence information and consult with experts before deciding how I will vote on the final resolution when it is considered on the Senate floor.”
Translation: “Gotta do some more polling, see whether the measure will pass, and figure out what’s most likely to work out best for me.”
Unable to justify such hackery by a Democratic Senator, Washington Post political reporter Chris Cilizza, who has been laughably cited (by Democrats, of course) as a “non-partisan” Post journalist, offered this as his only substantive commentary on Markey’s pusillanimous non-vote:
“Markey’s “present” vote, of course, doesn’t hold a candle to then-Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) voting “not proven” on the impeachment of Bill Clinton — citing, wait for it, Scottish law.”
1. “It’s not the worst thing” ( The Ethics Alarms bottom-of-the-barrel rationalization), and
2. Republican Senators are hacks too!
It must be comforting to the Democratic hacks in the Senate to know that however badly they act, the biased hacks in the mainstream media will cover for them. Not surprisingly, the same paper’s reporters offered no excuses for John McCain’s more trivial but also unethical abdication of his duties by playing poker while the Senate was debating whether to kill people or not. They just publicized the jokes others made about it-–less than McCain deserves, but far short of searching for a Democrat who was caught playing Spider Solitaire during the vote on Iraq.
Pointer: Chris Plante