Roberts lost out in election, too

Sen. Pat Roberts, R-Kan., wasn’t on the ballot last week, but the election results will have the dramatic effect of demoting him from chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee to, presumably, its ranking minority member. Many will cheer that development, having concluded that Roberts is nothing but a White House water carrier on the long-overdue assessment of what went wrong on the prewar intelligence in Iraq, as well as other matters. But count on Roberts to remain an outspoken voice on the panel, which is so crucial to defending the nation against terrorists. And expect the change to be one of many that Kansans will see imposed on their still-GOP-heavy delegation in Washington, D.C., now that power has shifted to the left.
Posted by Rhonda Holman

14 Comments

  1. political_mom
    Posted November 15, 2006 at 5:15 am | Permalink

    Wonder if he knew or had anything to do with Faux News paying off 2 million to the terrorists who kidnapped their people.Iran-Contra anyone? Hypocrites much?

    http://wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=52960

    I’m so glad this came from an ultra conservative source.

  2. steve
    Posted November 15, 2006 at 7:11 am | Permalink

    Roberts will still try and spin anything coming out of his committee, you can bank on it. But he won’t be able to prevent the release of info. like in the past.

  3. hmmm ...
    Posted November 15, 2006 at 7:41 am | Permalink

    I hope all the brown-nose toadies like Roberts and Tiahrt get shunted to the back of the room and made irrelevant. They lived by the sword of extreme partisanship; let them die by it.

  4. TRACY
    Posted November 15, 2006 at 7:42 am | Permalink

    Yeah, what ever happened to Pat’s thorough investigations?Ya’ think he quit taking those pills and then forgot all about it?I think so.

  5. dave s
    Posted November 15, 2006 at 8:01 am | Permalink

    And now we will see if the Senate Intelligence Committee actually had the info the Sen. Roberts says they DIDN’T have. I’ll bet they did.

  6. hmmm ...
    Posted November 15, 2006 at 8:16 am | Permalink

    dave – I hear the shredders have been working overtime.

  7. CF
    Posted November 15, 2006 at 9:22 am | Permalink

    hmmm,

    Pre-election, Wonkette had that photo of the shredder service truck lumbering its way into the Vice-Presidential compound.

    It’s going to be fun watching Roberts and Tiahrt in the minority. But come to think of it, now that both of them have been emasculated, writing them angry letters and arguing with their staffers isn’t going to be nearly the fun it once was.

    This is one of many problems with Kansas’ one-sided voting pattern: when Republicans are in the minority, the concerns of the state are under-represented at the national level.

    Somebody on another blog pointed out a very interesting fact. Namely, that because Tom Delay’s gerrymandered redistricting produced solidly Republican districts, the handover of the House to Democrats means that Texas is now unrepresented in the House. Texas now sends more Republican representatives to a national body that is controlled by the Democratic Party.

    All of which is to say that the way the machinery works is well beyond the ability of individuals or even parties to manipulate for very long. And thank God.

  8. Dan Warren
    Posted November 15, 2006 at 9:24 am | Permalink

    The words “senate” and “intelligence” are two words that should not appear in the sentence because it’s a contradiction. And of course, “political intelligence” is an oxymoron.

  9. ksfarmgrrl
    Posted November 15, 2006 at 10:20 am | Permalink

    “And expect the change to be one of many that Kansans will see imposed on their still-GOP-heavy delegation in Washington, D.C., now that power has shifted to the left.”

    Gosh, the WE must be so proud for endorsing toddly because of his SENIORITY!!!!!!!!

    heheheheh. Emasculated. I like that CF. I wonder if the WE will like being represented by someone singing in a “slightly higher key”.

    I guess that should be “someones”. Four of them to be exact.

  10. Posted November 15, 2006 at 10:44 am | Permalink

    Good point, CF.

    Even when Repubs win, they lose.

    To the victors, go the pork.

    And how ’bout those Hispanic voters? Turns out that wanting to send grandma back to Durango is not popular with the Latin voters.

    Way to screw up, Hispanophobes . . .

  11. Posted November 15, 2006 at 10:48 am | Permalink

    And our friend Roberts has played Igor to Dr. Frankenstein for long enough.

    Now we villagers with our torches and pitchforks get to throw open doors to the secret laboratory and see what monsters they’ve been hiding.

    Sucks to be him . . .

  12. Steven Davis
    Posted November 15, 2006 at 11:42 am | Permalink

    I did not know the following about Murtha:

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/11/14/AR2006111401230.html

  13. Posted November 15, 2006 at 3:40 pm | Permalink

    Wow, this Ruth Marcus just seems to be a freaking ENCYCLOPEDIA on old corruption charges against Dems.

    Too bad she seems to know nothing about the Republicans.

    Funny that . . . .

  14. CF
    Posted November 15, 2006 at 7:46 pm | Permalink

    Indeed. “Unindicted co-conspirator” is a factual claim that Ms. Marcus doesn’t feel bound to defend.

    Funny, that…