Re: [pf] The Decision - the hope that lies ahead

by Sharon Flesher

15 December 2000 16:10 UTC

Diane wrote:
> Another concern a friend mentioned to me is the possibility of
"bi-partisan"
> appointments.  For instance, appointing a Democratic senator to a Cabinet
> post, and then, if that senator's state is controlled by Republicans, a
> Republican senator replacing him.

Bush has already announced a meeting with Sen. John Breaux (D-La.); the news
story speculated that he might be considering Breaux for Energy Secretary,
but Breaux has said he was not interested in a job in the Bush
administration. Louisiana currently is governed by a Republican.

But if Breaux could be persuaded, what a coup. The Senate would have a 51-49
GOP majority, and Bush could claim he has a bipartisan cabinet even though
he's chosen a Democrat whose voting record would make him quite comfortable
in the Republican Party. And Breaux has been an ardent supporter of oil and
petrochemical interests, so he would be very compatible with a Bush
administration on energy policy.

Diane also wrote:
<Speaking as a Democrat from Oklahoma, just remember that a "Dixiecrat" is
not necessarily the same thing as a Democrat in other parts of the country.>

This is one of the things that irked me to no end during the campaign. Bush,
with the tacit complicity of the mainstream media, managed to portray
himself as a "uniter, not a divider" because he worked in a "bipartisan"
fashion with Texas Democrats. As a native North Carolinian, I know all about
southern Democrats. Jesse Helms was originally a Democrat. It does not
impress me in the least that Bush found willing conspirators among Texas
Democrats. But we'll see how he gets along with Charlie Rangel and Henry
Waxman!

Sharon Flesher
CarSharing Traverse, Inc.
Traverse City, Mich.
sflesher@traverse.net

"Be the change you wish to see." M.K. Gandhi