November 08, 2007
Obama Won't Show for Mukasey Vote
Barack Obama, on a bus tour through Iowa the last two days, will miss the Senate vote tonight to confirm Michael Mukasey for attorney general, according to a spokesman.
"Sen. Obama won't be going back to DC tonight to vote for Mukasey," said Robert Gibbs, Obama's communications director. "He's already announced his position on it. I don't think the vote will be close."
Obama has told reporters on the trail with him that he could not support a nominee unwilling to be candid about his feelings on torture, according to NBC/NJ's Aswini Anburajan.
So he's missed the Mukasey and Iran votes ... Change agent? Courageous candiate willing to take tough stands? You decide.
(JENNIFER SKALKA)
Posted at 08:56 PM
Comments
Well, if the votes not close, what's the point? His position on it is known and has been known for quite some time. For a long time he has said that he will not support Mukasey and true to his word he has not. But that's what leadership is, isn't it? Coming out far in advance with your position and sticking with it. Good on ya, Obama!
ReggieH | 11.08.07 10:46 PM
 |
Clinton, and biden missed the vote also, it was supposed to take place next week , but the senate leader moved it up and the canidates didn't have nough time to return, kind of like what happened with the iran vote, obama missed
kyle | 11.08.07 11:44 PM
|
Is that your impression of a stupid Fox News reporter?
Obama took a stand on both of those issues. Whether or not he actually casts a meaningless vote on them is irrelevant.
Mike | 11.08.07 11:53 PM
|
I don't follow the suggestion that Obama is somehow less courageous or less of an agent for change because he didn't leave the campaign trail to go to DC for a vote that was not going to be close on an issue that he had clearly expressed his position on. He made clear his opposition, so he can't later hedge on the question of where he was on the issue.
If anything, Obama's move was more courageous than if he'd gone and voted, because he's showing confidence that he can withstand people who like to respond to statements about serious issues with follow-up questions like "If you care so much about this issue, why didn't you spend a day traveling to cast a vote that didn't matter on it?"
Rich | 11.09.07 01:31 AM
|
Could you be any more snarky? NONE of the presidential candidates (including McCain) were at the vote. The vote wasn't supposed to take place until next week. Harry Reid moved the vote up to last night.
I guess they all figured that their vote wasn't going to change the outcome, so why fly back.
Sneaky | 11.09.07 07:51 AM
|
And...THEY ALL MISSED THE VOTE.
What ever happened to research???
David | 11.09.07 08:09 AM
|
Close? Not at all.
He'll probably say, "By not casting a vote, I registered my protest." After all, it worked so well before for him.
corinne | 11.09.07 08:47 AM
|
I'm really starting to get pissed off at Obama. Vote, Barack, just vote for once.
I suppose he's making his position known, but how about going on the Senate floor and putting it on record? It would be a waste of time since Reid caved in for simple majority, something that the Republican Party would never dream of if the roles were reversed.
60 votes for Democratic interests, simple majority for Republican interests... ridiculous.
Broadway Carl | 11.09.07 10:35 AM
|
So your boss asks you to show up for a presentation. You let your boss know your position for the presentation but decide to no-show b/c you have a job interview for a different job.
Acceptable?
anyonymous | 11.10.07 10:47 AM
|
Post a comment
The Watergate · 600 New Hampshire Ave., NW
Washington, DC 20037
202-739-8400 · fax 202-833-8069
NationalJournal.com is an Atlantic Media publication.
