http://www.bloggernews.net/18978 High-quality English language analysis and editorial writing on the news. Fri, 09 Jan 2009 08:39:42 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.3.3 http://www.bloggernews.net/18978#comment-66888 paradise Sun, 29 Jul 2007 18:46:39 +0000 http://www.bloggernews.net/18978#comment-66888 I have been reading comments like this about Mitch McConnell and Bill Frist for quite a while. I have the utmost respect for Mitch McConnell. He is an experienced political operative, and certainly knows how to handle the arcane machinery that is the Senate. But I have a different perspective on Bill Frist. I have actually done quite a bit of research about him as majority leader. I became interested in this issue, because of a statement by Senator Domenici in which he said that he thought that if anyone took the time to look, they would be amazed at the legislation that got passed during Frist's term as leader. Then I heard McConnell say that he thought the four years under Frist were the most productive period in his time in the Senate. Well, since I am retired and have a lot of time for this kind of stuff, I decided to take a look. You know what, I was really shocked. Frist did get a lot of legislation through his first three years. Not much the last year, because of the election. The other thing that keeps occurring to me is that Frist was the unanimous choice of the Republicans in 2003 and 2005. Mitch, the political operative, was his Whip. All of the Republicans knew that Frist had only been in the Senate 8 years when they chose him. I'm sure they were well aware of his inexperience, but I think they were comfotable with him in there because they knew they had McConnell, Santorum and Kyl backing him up. Also keep in mind that under the archaic rules of the Senate, where 60 votes are needed almost every time, it is much easier to be the minority than it is the majority. I take nothing away from McConnell, but I'm sure that he would have had the same difficulties that Senator Frist had, if the Republicans had remained in the majority. I have been reading comments like this about Mitch McConnell and Bill Frist for quite a while. I have the utmost respect for Mitch McConnell. He is an experienced political operative, and certainly knows how to handle the arcane machinery that is the Senate. But I have a different perspective on Bill Frist. I have actually done quite a bit of research about him as majority leader. I became interested in this issue, because of a statement by Senator Domenici in which he said that he thought that if anyone took the time to look, they would be amazed at the legislation that got passed during Frist’s term as leader. Then I heard McConnell say that he thought the four years under Frist were the most productive period in his time in the Senate. Well, since I am retired and have a lot of time for this kind of stuff, I decided to take a look. You know what, I was really shocked. Frist did get a lot of legislation through his first three years. Not much the last year, because of the election. The other thing that keeps occurring to me is that Frist was the unanimous choice of the Republicans in 2003 and 2005. Mitch, the political operative, was his Whip. All of the Republicans knew that Frist had only been in the Senate 8 years when they chose him. I’m sure they were well aware of his inexperience, but I think they were comfotable with him in there because they knew they had McConnell, Santorum and Kyl backing him up. Also keep in mind that under the archaic rules of the Senate, where 60 votes are needed almost every time, it is much easier to be the minority than it is the majority. I take nothing away from McConnell, but I’m sure that he would have had the same difficulties that Senator Frist had, if the Republicans had remained in the majority.

]]>