#1 Senate Republicans block vote on Hagel nomination02-15-2013, 12:49 AM
By Paul Kane and Ed O’Keefe, Updated: Thursday, February 14, 4:52 PM
Senate Republicans blocked a vote on Chuck Hagel’s nomination as secretary of defense on Thursday, launching an unprecedented filibuster and a severe rebuke to the White House.
Falling one vote shy of the 60 needed to move forward on the nomination, the Hagel filibuster brought stark condemnations from President Obama and Senate Democrats for its precedent-setting nature -- the first time a defense secretary nominee had been filibustered. The setback came during what many believe is a critical period for the Pentagon as it winds down troops from Afghanistan and implements costly budget cuts.
It was also a hard slap to a former colleague and member of the chamber.
Asked about the Senate vote during an online “fireside hangout,” Obama said that he expects that Hagel will be confirmed. But he slammed Senate Republicans for their “unprecedented filibuster” of a defense chief nominee.
“What seems to be happening, and this has been growing over time, is the Republican minority in the Senate seems to think that the rule now is that you need to have 60 votes for everything,” Obama said. “Well, that’s not the rule.”
He added that “it’s just unfortunate that this kind of politics intrudes at a time when I’m still presiding over a war in Afghanistan and I need a secretary of defense who is coordinating with our allies” on U.S. strategy in the region.
This is one time I would love to see the behind the scenes temper tantrum Obama likely threw.
If this was a movie some hacker would have cracked the Oval office cam and commandeered all the TV networks and would be playing it live, why can't shit like that ever happen in reality.The difference between pigs and people is that when they tell you you're cured it isn't a good thing.
02-15-2013, 02:02 AM
- Join Date
- Jul 2009
What a complete waste of time and what little political capital that the GOP retains.Olde-style, states' rights conservative. Ask if this concept confuses you.
02-15-2013, 03:46 AM
- Join Date
- Jul 2009
Does anyone genuinely think that if the GOP manage to block Hagel, that for some strange reason Barack Obama will appoint someone more acceptable to conservatives/Republicans? I sure as hell don't.
Cabinet positions are a privilege of the Executive. It's just silly to think that Obama is going to surround himself with conservatives, just as it would be silly to think that Reagan would surround himself with a bunch of Ted Kennedys or DUers for his Cabinet. Ultimately, Obama will get the Cabinet personnel that he wants. It's his privilege to do so, whether any of us like it or not. Same went with Bush, same went with Clinton, same went with Bush 41, same went with Reagan, and so on, and so forth.
Save these fights for judicial nominees. For Cabinet positions, this is a waste of time and trouble, and ultimately just hands the Left the "obstructionist" label that they so desperately want to slap upon the bumper of the Right, complete with willing accomplices in the media.
Worry about it with lifetime nominees. Don't worry about it for someone who will, as likely as not, "retire with dignity" in two years.
As it stands right now, when Justice Stephens kicks the bucket in the next couple of years, the GOP look like a bunch of petulant children when Obama picks freaking Jeremiah Wright or some such ludicrous radical as a Supreme Court Justice. If they had passed through Hagel, they could say "hey, we're all about advise and consent, but this guy is off the hook," but if they have fought tooth and nail over some guy to be a Secretary of Something, then they come off looking like petulant, argumentative assholes. They basically lose all moral standing to oppose someone on "fundamental grounds" or whatever with an idiotic fight over Chuck Hagel for SECDEF. They come off as genuinely concerned statesmen if they just let Hagel through (we've had far worse in that position, after all) and can claim that they are "working with" Obama. Obama is left without a complaint in that case.Olde-style, states' rights conservative. Ask if this concept confuses you.
02-15-2013, 04:36 AM
Republicans in the house and senate have no political capital, clout, reputation, accomplishments, nothing whatsoever to protect. They are at the bottom of the pit face down in the dirt with Obama's boot on their neck, they can lay their in submission or they can fight to squirm out of where they are. Our opinion of them really could be no lower.
They have no where to go but up, the people that voted them in are the only people they need worry themselves with, the left for dammed sure did not vote them in it was conservatives that voted for them and we won't again if every battle they come to they say they are saving it for the next one and lie there submissively.
they need to fight every battle they come too if they are going to stand any chance whatsoever of gaining any kind of reputation.
No need to worry Adam, they'll give up, this won't last, we have seen this group in battle before and their is no need to guess what they are made of.
If they chose to there is only one way they can go.The difference between pigs and people is that when they tell you you're cured it isn't a good thing.
02-15-2013, 05:13 AM
Liberalism Is The Philosophy Of The Stupid
To Achieve Ordered Liberty You Must Have Moral Order As Well
The libs/dems of today are the Quislings of former years. The cowards who would vote a fraud into office in exchange for handouts from the devil.
|« Previous Thread | Next Thread »|