Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 17 of 17
  1. #11  
    Senior Member Eupher's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Mizz-uhr-ah
    Posts
    538
    Quote Originally Posted by Arroyo_Doble View Post
    The Secretary of HHS is a pretty important position with regards to said legacy. If the Senate Republicans chose to thwart filling the position, something they have shown they have no problem doing, it would just be another means of sabotaging the project. I can understand why they want her gone so badly. It sure the hell isn't because of mismanagement. An efficient Affordable Care Act rollout is the last thing they want.

    In the unlikely event that the Republican political elite class would actually have the temerity and the unmitigated balls to even question Barry's appointment to HHS, what would stop Barry from just waiting till the Senate goes in recess and then appoint his next ass-kisser as a recess-appointee?

    He's done it before. What makes you think he wouldn't do it again, even though he's been spanked for it by the courts?
    U.S. Army, Retired
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #12  
    Festivus Moderator ralph wiggum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Springfield, USA
    Posts
    16,841
    Voted hottest "chick" at CU - My hotness transcends gender
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #13  
    LTC Member Odysseus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    FT Belvoir, VA
    Posts
    15,638
    Quote Originally Posted by Rockntractor View Post
    The difference between a brown noser and an ass kisser is depth perception.


    Quote Originally Posted by Arroyo_Doble View Post
    The Secretary of HHS is a pretty important position with regards to said legacy. If the Senate Republicans chose to thwart filling the position, something they have shown they have no problem doing, it would just be another means of sabotaging the project. I can understand why they want her gone so badly. It sure the hell isn't because of mismanagement. An efficient Affordable Care Act rollout is the last thing they want.
    ROFLOL!!!!! No mismanagement? The rollout was a train wreck of epic proportions. The sites crashed after minimal activity (eight million hits is the average for Amazon in about an hour, while the feds were overwhelmed after a week). The contingency plans for sign up relied on the sites that crashed. There was no beta testing. The company hired to set it up had been fired for incompetence by the Canadian government when they couldn't administer their system. The only thing that the Republicans did to "sabotage" it was to try to repeal it before it came out, and to delay implementation, something that the Democrats now want to do because it's crashed and burned so badly. Stop with the DNC talking points and try to actually address the issues.

    The Secretary of HHS is a pretty important position, period. So, instead of attempting to cut a deal with Senate Republicans, and find someone that they would not find objectionable or, in the event of a filibuster, try to do what he always does, which is let the media attack any resistance until the Republicans cave, he is going to sit by and leave a gibbering incompetent in the job? And exactly how many of Obama's appointees have been filibustered or otherwise defeated? One was filibustered, by Rand Paul, in order to draw attention to the NSA scandal. Most of Obama's appointments have sailed through confirmation hearings, even when they have demonstrated an appalling inability to make the case for their appointments. Chuck Hagel was so awful that people wondered why anyone should bother holding a hearing if he could get confirmed after his dismal performance. So, no, I don't think that the fear of a Republican filibuster is what is keeping him from sacking Sebelius.

    And, let's get back to the OP, for a second. Either he was blindsided, or he wasn't. Since you are arguing that he's keeping Sebelius on because of fear of Republican reaction (which would be a first for this administration), then you appear to be accepting the argument that she allowed him to be blindsided. The implications of this are that, as I suggested, he was completely out of the loop for three and a half years while his signature program was in development. So, either nobody gave him progress reports or identified potential red flags along the way, nor did he solicit any, or he was repeatedly lied to by his subordinates. The former situation implies negligence and incompetence on a grand scale on Obama's part, while the latter means that his subordinates wasted hundreds of millions of dollars and lied to him. There are no other logical explanations. Doesn't that bother you at all that you are arguing for Obama's keeping on someone who failed miserably and wasted that much time and money?

    Quote Originally Posted by Arroyo_Doble View Post
    I don't believe he could do so alone. A cloture vote requires 60, not 100.
    So? Again, if Republicans filibuster, there's no reason not to wait until the senate is in recess, and do a recess appointment. The odds on a Republican filibuster against a moderate liberal are somewhere between slim and none. A filibuster is only likely if the nominee is a loon, which is entirely likely, given that whoever takes the job will have the responsiblity for implementing Obamacare. Nobody in their right mind would take that job, but fortunately, that's not a requirement for service in a Democratic administration.

    Quote Originally Posted by Arroyo_Doble View Post
    No he didn't. He gave a long speech.
    Well, you have me there. There was no cloture vote involved, so technically, it wasn't a filibuster, it was just a long speech. However, that doesn't change any of the other arguments that I've made.

    Quote Originally Posted by Arroyo_Doble View Post
    He has enough already.
    That is true. We have as yet to plumb the depth of his capacity for whining and self-pity when he fails to get his way.
    --Odysseus
    Sic Hacer Pace, Para Bellum.

    Before you can do things for people, you must be the kind of man who can get things done. But to get things done, you must love the doing, not the people!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #14  
    Senior Member Arroyo_Doble's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Ft Worth
    Posts
    3,788
    Quote Originally Posted by Odysseus View Post
    ROFLOL!!!!! No mismanagement? The rollout was a train wreck of epic proportions. The sites crashed after minimal activity (eight million hits is the average for Amazon in about an hour, while the feds were overwhelmed after a week). The contingency plans for sign up relied on the sites that crashed. There was no beta testing. The company hired to set it up had been fired for incompetence by the Canadian government when they couldn't administer their system. The only thing that the Republicans did to "sabotage" it was to try to repeal it before it came out, and to delay implementation, something that the Democrats now want to do because it's crashed and burned so badly. Stop with the DNC talking points and try to actually address the issues.

    The Secretary of HHS is a pretty important position, period. So, instead of attempting to cut a deal with Senate Republicans, and find someone that they would not find objectionable or, in the event of a filibuster, try to do what he always does, which is let the media attack any resistance until the Republicans cave, he is going to sit by and leave a gibbering incompetent in the job? And exactly how many of Obama's appointees have been filibustered or otherwise defeated? One was filibustered, by Rand Paul, in order to draw attention to the NSA scandal. Most of Obama's appointments have sailed through confirmation hearings, even when they have demonstrated an appalling inability to make the case for their appointments. Chuck Hagel was so awful that people wondered why anyone should bother holding a hearing if he could get confirmed after his dismal performance. So, no, I don't think that the fear of a Republican filibuster is what is keeping him from sacking Sebelius.

    And, let's get back to the OP, for a second. Either he was blindsided, or he wasn't. Since you are arguing that he's keeping Sebelius on because of fear of Republican reaction (which would be a first for this administration), then you appear to be accepting the argument that she allowed him to be blindsided. The implications of this are that, as I suggested, he was completely out of the loop for three and a half years while his signature program was in development. So, either nobody gave him progress reports or identified potential red flags along the way, nor did he solicit any, or he was repeatedly lied to by his subordinates. The former situation implies negligence and incompetence on a grand scale on Obama's part, while the latter means that his subordinates wasted hundreds of millions of dollars and lied to him. There are no other logical explanations. Doesn't that bother you at all that you are arguing for Obama's keeping on someone who failed miserably and wasted that much time and money?
    You misunderstand. It doesn't matter whether she has been incompetent or not (since when has that mattered in government?). The Republicans have zero interest in making the ACA work. This tells me the calls for her to be fired are bullshit and simply just another ploy for fuck with the law.

    So? Again, if Republicans filibuster, there's no reason not to wait until the senate is in recess, and do a recess appointment.
    When is the next recess? Come to think of it, I believe the Supreme Court is taking up the issue of what a recess is soon.

    The odds on a Republican filibuster against a moderate liberal are somewhere between slim and none. A filibuster is only likely if the nominee is a loon, which is entirely likely, given that whoever takes the job will have the responsiblity for implementing Obamacare. Nobody in their right mind would take that job, but fortunately, that's not a requirement for service in a Democratic administration.
    Tautology.

    Well, you have me there. There was no cloture vote involved, so technically, it wasn't a filibuster, it was just a long speech. However, that doesn't change any of the other arguments that I've made.
    Yea. Obama sucks the ACA sucks blah blah blah.

    That is true. We have as yet to plumb the depth of his capacity for whining and self-pity when he fails to get his way.
    Yea. I heard you the first 5000 times.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #15  
    PORCUS MAXIMUS Rockntractor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    oklahoma
    Posts
    42,333
    Quote Originally Posted by Arroyo_Doble View Post
    You misunderstand. It doesn't matter whether she has been incompetent or not (since when has that mattered in government?). The Republicans have zero interest in making the ACA work. This tells me the calls for her to be fired are bullshit and simply just another ploy for fuck with the law.



    When is the next recess? Come to think of it, I believe the Supreme Court is taking up the issue of what a recess is soon.



    Tautology.



    Yea. Obama sucks the ACA sucks blah blah blah.



    Yea. I heard you the first 5000 times.
    Tell me the good points of Obamacare and why you think it will work from what you have learned in the last two months?

    Come on Dolby, sell it to me!
    The difference between pigs and people is that when they tell you you're cured it isn't a good thing.
    http://i.imgur.com/FHvkMSE.jpg
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #16  
    PORCUS MAXIMUS Rockntractor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    oklahoma
    Posts
    42,333
    Dolby got quiet, not a peep.
    The difference between pigs and people is that when they tell you you're cured it isn't a good thing.
    http://i.imgur.com/FHvkMSE.jpg
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #17  
    Senior Member DumbAss Tanker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    2,779
    The sun rising in the East would blindside that halfwit.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •