Bottom line, he voted for it. He is the problem. There was nothing stopping him from outting it loudly for everyone to hear. There was nothing stopping him from presenting his own bill that was 100% defense. I don't see the Republicans who voted against it scrambling to come up with excuses for shooting it down.
“Bottom line, he voted for it.”
Not a fair statement when we look at the vote in context. See my comments below.
“There was nothing stopping him from presenting his own bill that was 100% defense.”
Actually, Cornyn (and KBH, for that matter) voted against the Cloture Motion. The Cloture Motion is what required 60 percent, and it was the only chance a Republican minority had to stop this thing. If the 5 RINOs had not voted along with the Democrats on the Cloture Motion, we might have had a chance to remove the hate crime amendment.
See http://www.opencongress.org/vote/2009/s/326
After the Colture Motion passed (with the crucial votes from the RINOs), the remaining vote is only a 50 percent requirement and a done deal.
Again, I do not disagree with your preference that the final vote should have still been a “No.” I agree entirely. But I am not outraged by it. Cornyn stood up against the bill when he had a chance, and after that, what’s the point, really.
Do not completely overlook all the good Cornyn does, including for example, adding language to the current bill that improves the ability of our overseas troops to get their votes counted in time.