Comments on: Why the rush to praise Sen. Warner?

By: John Warner’s popularity « D2 route

John Warner’s popularity « D2 route — Thu, 06 Sep 2007 14:00:20 +0000

[...] Published September 6th, 2007 IOKIYAAR Scott Nolan comments at Blacknell blog: I think what has happened is that the current group of putzes in office have lowered our standards [...]

By: Scott Nolan

Scott Nolan — Wed, 05 Sep 2007 13:18:28 +0000

I think what has happened is that the current group of putzes in office have lowered our standards so much that even John Warner’s failed terms as a U.S. Senator look pretty decent and civilized in comparison.

It is a sad, sad state of affairs when liberals heap praise on a conservative just because he did not act like a frathouse bully, and completely ignore his record of supporting the war in Iraq.

Having said that - if Warner feels somewhat empowered by the praise, and by his new status as a nothing-to-lose senator, he might actually do some good while still in office. It is clear he regrets his blind support for this greedy and illegal war. Perhaps he can make a difference finally.

Time will tell.

By: MB

MB — Tue, 04 Sep 2007 03:18:47 +0000

James, you wouldn’t recognize decent if it jumped up and down in front of you.

By: Double standards « D2 route

Double standards « D2 route — Sat, 01 Sep 2007 14:36:39 +0000

[...] Published September 1st, 2007 IOKIYAAR Why the rush to praise Sen. Warner? I really don’t understand this rush to praise - as decent and honorable - someone who hasn’t [...]

By: James Young

James Young — Sat, 01 Sep 2007 04:51:30 +0000

As Dannyboy suggests, so frequently did Warner act like a Democrat, it’s surprising that you feel that he doesn’t meet your definition of a “decent Republicans,” i.e., a Republican who acts like a Democrat.

By: MB

MB — Fri, 31 Aug 2007 23:19:36 +0000

No, I don’t fetishize “civility” so much that it blinds me to the substantive damage that someone does. Further, all of his good work earlier in his career is outweighed, for me, by his failures in this term. I do believe that someone’s character is most visible when times are toughest, and Warner repeatedly failed to do the right thing - the Military Commissions Act, giving the President cover for torture, etc.

I’m quite comfortable not having a meshing philosophy with the Senator. That doesn’t make me partisan. That makes me someone who cares more about doing what’s right, and not doing what will benefit my political party. Warner, Kaine, and Webb have to give lip service to the muddle-headed masses that see value in empty bipartisanship. I don’t.

By: Dannyboy

Dannyboy — Fri, 31 Aug 2007 22:58:38 +0000

Why praise the man as decent and honorable?

Because he was.

In a time of partisan hacks and vicious divides, Warner was one of the few that we could trust to look for compromise, even if he was a conservative.

Look, I respect a lot of the things you say, man. But this is just a little too far. There’s a reason Warner has been in office for 30 years. There’s a reason he’s getting all this praise today, including from Warner, Kaine, and Webb. John Warner was a good man, and a good Senator. If you are SO partisan that you can’t see that… well, then that makes it easier to understand why you and the Senator don’t have meshing philosophies.