Breaking: Hagel filibustered — barely; Update: Rand Paul getting hammered by Ron fans for voting no

posted at 5:21 pm on February 14, 2013 by Allahpundit

He was one vote short. Republicans Cochran, Collins, and Johanns had all already committed to voting yes so the only mystery was whether Reid could find two more GOPers to cross the aisle. He found one: As expected, Murkowski ended up erring on the side of bipartisanship. Orrin Hatch voted present, which may or may not be his way of signaling that he’ll vote for Hagel when they try this again in a few weeks but not right now. But wait — what about Rand Paul? If ever there was a SecDef nominee whom the Ron Paul paleocon fan base could sort of dig, it’s a guy known for lamenting the “Israel lobby” and opposing Iran sanctions. Result:

Philip Klein, tongue in cheek, calls him today’s neocon hero. Paul’s going to catch endless crap for this from his dad’s supporters so I assume he’s a soft “no” on Hagel, not a hard “no” like Ted Cruz, and will vote yes next time once Hagel/the White House fulfills whatever condition he’s set for switching. That would be in keeping with his M.O. lately in trying to triangulate between mainstream righties and Paulworld. He’ll vote for Hagel, but only after he’s voted against him. We’ll see.

Oh, speaking of conditions for voting yes, the White House finally got back to McCain and Graham about their questions on Benghazi. Turns out that no, Obama never once called Libya’s president on the night an American ambassador was being murdered at the consulate. It was Hillary who took the 3 a.m. phone call. But then, in fairness, Obama was busy that night: He had a campaign event in Vegas to get ready for the next day.

Almost forgot: The reason the vote was 58/40 instead of 59/39 is because Reid switched his vote at the last minute. Procedurally, he has to vote no in order to be eligible to ask for another vote in a week or two. And at the moment, there’s no reason to believe Hagel won’t finally clear cloture when that happens.

Update: As expected, Rand’s got some triangulatin’ to do:

That explanation wasn’t good enough for Justin Raimondo, editorial director of Antiwar.com and a strong supporter of Ron Paul. “It’s time for libertarians to treat Rand Paul like the turncoat he is: boycott,” Raimondo tweeted. “No $$, no support, & start calling him Paul the Lesser.”…

Scott McConnell, one of the [American Conservative]’s founding editors, went a step further: “If Rand Paul persists on going demagogic on Hagel, he will have established beyond any serious doubt that regardless of who his father is, he is Bill Kristol and Jennifer Rubin’s boy.”…

Guardian blogger Glenn Greenwald, a liberal who has been sympathetic to the Pauls, complained, “Any hope Rand Paul was going to usher in some sort of new foreign policy in the GOP has just been torpedoed by his NO vote on Hagel cloture.”

How can he atone? Goodwill visit to Iran, maybe?


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3

Buddha!!!

Bmore on February 14, 2013 at 7:01 PM

That explanation wasn’t good enough for Justin Raimondo…start calling him Paul the Lesser.”

OMG they are going to call him a mean name. Not that! Dear God, not that!!11!!! /sarc

sharrukin on February 14, 2013 at 7:02 PM

Wow, imagine if Romney had this information during the debates. “Mr president, one question, did you even personally speak with the Libyan President the night of the attack? If not what were you doing at the time that was more important?” Amazing that this little creep Obama got reelected.

Zetterson on February 14, 2013 at 5:35 PM

Mr. President, we currently are sitting at 8% unemployment and have approximately 8 million less people in the workforce than when you took office. When exactly was the last time you convened your Jobs Council?

Mr. President, you repeatedly stated that Afghanistan was the right war? How long did it take you to have a face to face meeting with any of the on-the-ground generals from Afghanistan?

Mr. President, you promised to reduce the deficit in half by the end of your first term. You repeated this promise and signed a pledge to do so at the 2010 G-20. Have you reduced the deficit in half?

Mr. President, when was the last time you either read or were personally briefed on the contents of the PDB prior to September 11th, 2012? Were you aware or not of the previous attacks on the Benghazi embassy, which most assuredly would have been in your PDB’s? If you were not aware, why not, and if you were aware, why did you allow security to be outsourced to inexperienced militants that may or may not have been armed?

Those should have been enough to make him a one termer.

OK, I’m done. Feel free to add your own.

can_con on February 14, 2013 at 7:04 PM

Those “two posers” and the American public have been asking for real explanations from the White House since the night they were murdered—that’s what’s disgusting pal.

Rovin on February 14, 2013 at 6:51 PM

Those two posers are part of the reason Benghazi and the Arab Spring happened. They pushed for intervention in Libya and now they don’t like the results.

RickB on February 14, 2013 at 7:05 PM

Hagel, who served as president and CEO of the World USO from 1987 to 1990, expressed intense opposition to the USO Haifa Center during a tumultuous 1989 meeting with Jewish leaders, according to multiple sources involved in the fight to keep the post open.

“He said to me, ‘Let the Jews pay for it’,” said Marsha Halteman, director for military and law enforcement programs at the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs (JINSA), which led the battle to keep USO Haifa operational. (Source: Commentary magazine online, 1/4/13)

The USO is a non-profit organisation outside of the Federal government so no taxpayer dollars were involved.

Anyhoo…

Imagine if a nominee for Health and Human Services secretary was on record saying, “Let the blacks pay for it.” Or: “Let Hispanics pay for it.” The outrage would be deafening—and not surprising.

Why not even a whimper from Obama’s colleagues in Congress with equally racist remarks by a nominee for one of the nation’s most important and powerful posts?

Hagel’s record is too much for even the staunchly pro-Obama, leftist Washington Post’s Editorial Board, who recently wrote that:

“CHUCK HAGEL IS NOT THE RIGHT CHOICE FOR DEFENSE SECRETARY.”

Resist We Much on February 14, 2013 at 7:06 PM

To the Ron Paul fans who’re all up in arms: use your friggin God-given brains. We are not a bunch of still-unrepentant-NeoCons or holdout racist NeoConfeds, so quit yer **** WHINING!

MelonCollie on February 14, 2013 at 7:09 PM

Senator Paul did exactly the right thing, he made sure that someone incompetent was not put in charge of our military.

Panther on February 14, 2013 at 7:09 PM

Just goes to show how anti-Semitic the Paultards are.

catmman on February 14, 2013 at 7:09 PM

The fact that Paulbots are up in arms against Rand for voting no on an incompetent nominee speaks more of them, than him.

can_con on February 14, 2013 at 7:09 PM

bluefox on February 14, 2013 at 6:21 PM

Those “two posers” and the American public have been asking for real explanations from the White House since the night they were murdered—that’s what’s disgusting pal.

Rovin on February 14, 2013 at 6:51 PM

I understand that. What amazes me is that McCain/Graham tries to pretend that their vote on Hagel hinges on the answer to this one question.
Evidently they and others in Congress haven’t figured truth to this Administration is like a Cross to a Vampire. Most of us figured that out in 2007 or earlier.

bluefox on February 14, 2013 at 7:11 PM

if Ted Cruz hadn’t been elected, Kay Bailey would have given him his one more vote

burserker on February 14, 2013 at 7:12 PM

That explanation wasn’t good enough for Justin Raimondo, editorial director of Antiwar.com and a strong supporter of Ron Paul. “It’s time for libertarians to treat Rand Paul like the turncoat he is: boycott,” Raimondo tweeted. “No $$, no support, & start calling him Paul the Lesser.”…

Ron Paul supporters can go suck on it. Ron Paul is an evil vile man. His son shows some sense
and shows that he has a pair. Ron Paul supporters helped Obama get elected. You all can go to hell.
After Ron Pauls rant about Chris Kyle he lifted the gates of hell and this will be war you MF’s…..

redguy on February 14, 2013 at 7:12 PM

The fact that Paulbots are up in arms against Rand for voting no on an incompetent nominee speaks more of them, than him.

can_con on February 14, 2013 at 7:09 PM

Exactly. Hagel has no business running the Pentagon, regardless of his feelings towards Israel.

changer1701 on February 14, 2013 at 7:12 PM

Buddha!!!

Bmore on February 14, 2013 at 7:01 PM

I’m sure he’ll vote no the next time Reid brings it up for a vote.

So far so good Rand:-)

bluefox on February 14, 2013 at 7:14 PM

Senator Paul did exactly the right thing, he made sure that someone incompetent was not put in charge of our military.

Panther on February 14, 2013 at 7:09 PM

Exactly. Makes me respect him a little bit more.

gophergirl on February 14, 2013 at 7:14 PM

Allahpundit needs to go to the Daily Paul to get a better perspective on Rand’s support from Ron’s followers. I supported Ron and I like Rand, too, actually maybe better. Rand is not”getting hammered” over there. There are those who don’t know what is going on and there are those who have some understanding and knowledge of Hagle, et al. Rand is opposing Hagel for now until he gets more information on his finances and where his money came from. There are some rumors about Hagel getting financing from Iran. This is what Rand is concerned about as he should be as well as everybody should be. I think maybe Allahpundit sees Rand as a threat to the establishment candidate and would like to bring him down sooner rather than later.

Puma for Life on February 14, 2013 at 7:16 PM

That explanation wasn’t good enough for Justin Raimondo, editorial director of Antiwar.com and a strong supporter of Ron Paul. “It’s time for libertarians to treat Rand Paul like the turncoat he is: boycott,” Raimondo tweeted. “No $$, no support, & start calling him Paul the Lesser.”…

Why I stopped voting Libertarian.

rbj on February 14, 2013 at 7:17 PM

I was going to ask when qualifications became irrelevant and politics preeminent but had to slap myself.

Right, the White House, that guy. The one who knows less than nobody about everything (I know, you have to think a minute on that one).

But really, Hagel’s a hack who made a fool of himself at his most important moment — his nomination hearing — but Rand Paul is supposed to vote for him anyway because his politics are right for some people?

Can we move the San Andreas Fault from California and put it underneath Washington. At least then we might have a chance.

IndieDogg on February 14, 2013 at 7:18 PM

Rand Paul votes no on Hagel cloture

He is NOT his father.

Rand is a Tea Party person. He will also vote NO next time any other vote and his base will abandon him.

Steveangell on February 14, 2013 at 7:18 PM

Ron Paul and his followers are a bunch of pro Islamofascists.Israe,.our only real ally in the Middle East can do no right and the Muslims can do no wrong.I am in favor of getting out of Afghanistan and Iraq because we shouldn’t be shedding American blood for a bunch of thugs who hate us,but it sickens me when I hear Paultards blame America for terrorist attacks against us.What a bunch of anti-American morons!

redware on February 14, 2013 at 7:19 PM

Resist We Much on February 14, 2013 at 7:06 PM

You really need to pare down your comments—I keep posting them over at the Washington Post and it’s driving the liberals nuts!

Rovin on February 14, 2013 at 7:21 PM

It almost didn’t happen–but it did. It was a narrow miss for the Dems–but it was a miss. It may not accomplish anything in the long run–but it may. It is a small victory–but it is a victory.

Given the mind-boggling losses we’ve suffered in the last few months, I’ll take it and enjoy it for as long as I can. And I’ll even go so far as to wish us many more victories in the days ahead: May this be the beginning of the end for Obama’s destructive plans for this nation, and may all who would harm our country be kept out or swept out of any positions of authority in our government.

butterflies and puppies on February 14, 2013 at 7:23 PM

“It’s time for libertarians to treat Rand Paul like the turncoat he is …”

LOL!!!!!! And meanwhile, Ron Paul supporters continue to completely ignore this NEWS:

‘Ron Paul, UN Hater, Asks UN To Take RonPaul.com Forcefully From Ron Paul’s Biggest Supporters’

http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130210/01422321932/ron-paul-un-hater-asks-un-to-take-ronpaulcom-forcefully-ron-pauls-biggest-supporters.shtml

‘Ron Paul files complaint with UN agency in fight over namesake website’

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/02/11/ron-paul-files-suit-for-domain-name-leaving-supporters-bummed-but-fighting/

If Ron Paul’s dopey supporters are looking for a TURNCOAT – they need look no further than Big-Daddy-Hypocrite Ron.

Pork-Chop on February 14, 2013 at 7:24 PM

Right, the White House, that guy. The one who knows less than nobody about everything (I know, you have to think a minute on that one).

IndieDogg on February 14, 2013 at 7:18 PM

Is that the same as being the guy that knows more than everybody about nothing?

can_con on February 14, 2013 at 7:25 PM

In the political sphere, is there anything nuttier than a rabid Paulbot?

BKeyser on February 14, 2013 at 7:33 PM

If the vaunted Allahpundit does not know what the (a) filibuster is, how can he have the hubrus to post an opinion about on Hot Air. What happened was the senate voted NOT to invoke cloture, not filibuster! Cloture is limiting the amount of talking about business by senate members. A filibuster MAY result if there is no limit to discussion (cloture). These readers depend on people like Allahpundit to at least educate them on what is happening. AP, you are a huge disappointment. No wonder we have a huge sea of low information voters! You should apologize. Your chance to star and you blew it!

Old Country Boy on February 14, 2013 at 6:19 PM

The word “filibuster” has been used synonymously with “blocking cloture” for years, by the vast majority of political observers. If you wish to use it in a different fashion, then that’s up to you. Presuming that others care about such hairsplitting distinctions simply because you do might be considered “hubris”, in fact.

And who the hell depends on allahpundit to educate them anyway, regardless? Most of us are here so that we can get into meaningless fights with the other commenters.

RINO in Name Only on February 14, 2013 at 7:35 PM

The antisemitic dopeheads are NOT pleased. No sirree! ;-)

tommy71 on February 14, 2013 at 7:38 PM

Can those Ronulans beclown themselves any further? They expect Rand to be Ron reincarnate. Their hatred for Israel is disgusting. They would love nothing more than to have an jooooooooo hater Hagel as SecDef. Thank Rand, hold the line against Hagel.

D-fusit on February 14, 2013 at 7:38 PM

Just goes to show how anti-Semitic the Paultards are.

catmman on February 14, 2013 at 7:09 PM

I fear this really is the case. I’ve been thinking about this for a while now myself, and I think the Ronulans, Paubots, Paulites, whatever you want to call them are a bunch of anti-war, anti-semites. I wish I were wrong.

I am IMMENSELY happy to see that Rand Paul differs from his father in this regard. He keeps rising in my esteem lately.

Othniel on February 14, 2013 at 7:39 PM

If I were Sen. Paul, I’d wear Justin Raimondo’s hate like a badge of honor. Getting called names by Raimondo is like getting like having your America First credentials questioned by Charles Lindbergh circa 1941.

Athanasius on February 14, 2013 at 7:40 PM

An investor friend told me that Harry Reid is an expert “Middle Eastern mudslider”

J_Crater on February 14, 2013 at 7:43 PM

Mya the Aqua Buddha rain many blessings on Rand.

He flipped the bird to his father’s own nutjobs, because even Ron knew he had become a slave to their wants.

Rand is awesome.

budfox on February 14, 2013 at 7:50 PM

Look at how the voting went. The Dems voted in a monolithic block, like they always do. Some Reps voted with the Dems. This is how it almost always goes and yet the media hypes the Dems as wanting bipartisanship. Has anyone on here ever seen a chart or graph showing which party is more consistently bipartisan in their voting? It may just be my impression that the Dems consistently vote as one entity.

Ibanez Lotus on February 14, 2013 at 7:50 PM

Othniel,

The Paultards are anti-war only so much as it doesn’t relate to Jews.

If its warfare against said Jews or the state of Israel, they’re all for it.

They have never made bones about their anti-semitism, even on this very blog. Untold numbers of them have been banned for their anti-Semitic statements.

Only opportunistic anti-Semites like the good Herr Doktor himself keep their true feelings hidden or couched in easily dismissed rhetoric.

The older Paul finally let his true feelings about Americas war fighters known last week with the death of Chris Kyle. It’s only a matter of time before he lets his Trutherism and anti-semitism loose.

catmman on February 14, 2013 at 7:51 PM

Puma for Life on February 14, 2013 at 7:16 PM

Thanks for some perspective on this. Always good to have various points of view.

bluefox on February 14, 2013 at 7:52 PM

If Rand courts people like Raimondo and Greenwald, he can go to hell.

Blake on February 14, 2013 at 7:53 PM

I think maybe Allahpundit sees Rand as a threat to the establishment candidate and would like to bring him down sooner rather than later.

Puma for Life on February 14, 2013 at 7:16 PM

Yes, that must be it. Your critics are all either Agents of the Establishment™, or Duped by the Establishment™, or Intimidated by The Establishment™, or Pawns of The Establishment™, or beholden to The Establishment™ in some other manner.

This kind of kooky paranoia among his supporters is why Ron Paul never got anywhere (well, that, and also the machinations of The Establishment™, of course). Pointing to friction between Rand Paul and his father’s fans is a complement, and should be taken as such.

RINO in Name Only on February 14, 2013 at 7:54 PM

start calling him Paul the Lesser.

A clown car stuffed with losers.

Kensington on February 14, 2013 at 7:56 PM

And what’s the deal with Greenwald? Why would he be so excited about Hagel?

Is GG an anti-Semite, too?

Kensington on February 14, 2013 at 7:58 PM

You really need to pare down your comments—I keep posting them over at the Washington Post and it’s driving the liberals nuts!

Rovin on February 14, 2013 at 7:21 PM

lmfao

Make sure that you also give them my partisan-non-partisan (read: anything or anyone not considered “right-wing” by any stretch of the imagination) links. I love it when they have to argue against their own.

( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

Resist We Much on February 14, 2013 at 8:00 PM

And what’s the deal with Greenwald? Why would he be so excited about Hagel?
Is GG an anti-Semite, too?

Kensington on February 14, 2013 at 7:58 PM

http://www.volokh.com/2012/01/28/glenn-greenwald-and-the-neocons/

If not an anti-Semite himself, he’s awfully willing to pander to them, Ron Paul style, with insinuations of dual loyalty, etc.

RINO in Name Only on February 14, 2013 at 8:06 PM

If not an anti-Semite himself, he’s awfully willing to pander to them, Ron Paul style, with insinuations of dual loyalty, etc.

RINO in Name Only on February 14, 2013 at 8:06 PM

Add this guy to your list:

http://twitchy.com/2013/01/31/anti-semite-mj-rosenberg-tweets-talked-about-israel-with-hagel-happily-hes-lying-today/

can_con on February 14, 2013 at 8:14 PM

I think maybe Allahpundit sees Rand as a threat to the establishment candidate and would like to bring him down sooner rather than later.

Puma for Life on February 14, 2013 at 7:16 PM

Seems to be going out of his way to find anything to critize Senator Paul. Of course I’m sure that Allah and his father agreed on abosultely everything.

Panther on February 14, 2013 at 8:22 PM

I think maybe Allahpundit sees Rand as a threat to the establishment candidate and would like to bring him down sooner rather than later.

Puma for Life on February 14, 2013 at 7:16 PM

Seems to be going out of his way to find anything to critize Senator Paul.

Panther on February 14, 2013 at 8:22 PM

Cheez Whiz, a right-wing political blogger being unfriendly to the son of Ron Paul. Oh gasp. Oh shock. Oh horror. Oh please.

The worst thing AP has said about Rand cannot hold a candle to some of the less-intelligent posters who think Godwin’s Law was invented by a butthurt Nazi.

MelonCollie on February 14, 2013 at 8:26 PM

Allah’s most important take away from the Hagel confirmation was that some unknown was upset with Senator Paul? Repubs constantly amaze me with their inability to focus.

Panther on February 14, 2013 at 8:35 PM

Repubs constantly amaze me with their inability to focus.

Panther on February 14, 2013 at 8:35 PM

I’m confused.

I thought it was the Dems who were trying to focus.

All of us.

coldwarrior on February 14, 2013 at 8:41 PM

I thought it was the Dems who were trying to focus.

All of us.

coldwarrior on February 14, 2013 at 8:41 PM

Well played…and accurate!

Panther on February 14, 2013 at 8:45 PM

I’m terribly disappointed in Johanns. Seems like he would rather do a friend a favor than do what’s right for America and her allies. Pathetic.

NebCon on February 14, 2013 at 8:53 PM

SENATOR Paul is doing the job of a senator. His Dad played a different role as a REPRESENTATIVE.

An Objectivist on February 14, 2013 at 8:56 PM

Collins had indicated that she would vote “yes” on cloture but “no” on confirmation.

What do we have in the Senate? A bunch of do-si-do-ing dance partners who change partners occasionally in order to look collegial?

onlineanalyst on February 14, 2013 at 9:05 PM

Why do Progs want, as their SecDef, a man that attended the same amount of colleges that Sarah Palin did, but had a lower grade point average (D)?

I guess they want people just like them to occupy high offices.

Resist We Much on February 14, 2013 at 9:07 PM

APACHEWHOKNOWS on February 14, 2013 at 5:40 PM

A wise person once said that DC and environs are one of the wealthier portions of the country that produce absolutely nothing.

onlineanalyst on February 14, 2013 at 9:09 PM

Why do Progs want, as their SecDef, a man, who is IGNORANT of the foreign policy positions of the administration in which he wants to serve?

I guess they want their SecDef to be just like them.

Resist We Much on February 14, 2013 at 9:11 PM

He’ll vote for Hagel, but only after he’s voted against him. We’ll see

.

No. If he does his credibility will explode among a far larger group than Ron Paul groupies.

rrpjr on February 14, 2013 at 9:13 PM

Murkowski is a cancer.

Pork-Chop on February 14, 2013 at 5:37 PM

That’s why the R’s supported her, she’s a good friend of the Dems.
She had a lot of RINO support against Miller. That’s the reason.

bluefox on February 14, 2013 at 5:51 PM

She’s WORSE than cancer…….she’s a virulent form of AIDS!

williamg on February 14, 2013 at 9:13 PM

Why do Progs want, as their SecDef, a man, who was described by an Obama adviser as “BAFFLING” and “INCOMPREHENSIBLE”?

I guess they want their SecDef to be described just as they are.

Resist We Much on February 14, 2013 at 9:14 PM

Why do Progs want to put into office a BIGOT, who has made anti-Semitic comments frequently, has demonstrated homophobia, and is even against abortion even in the case of rape?

I guess they want a “bigoted hater” just like themselves.

Resist We Much on February 14, 2013 at 9:21 PM

He was one vote short. Republicans Cochran, Collins, and Johanns had all already committed to voting yes so the only mystery was whether Reid could find two more GOPers to cross the aisle. He found one: As expected, Murkowski ended up erring on the side of bipartisanship.

All Karl Rove-type “conservatives.”

Just sayin’.

Kent18 on February 14, 2013 at 9:23 PM

Rand Paul is clearly operating under the control of the Kentucky Zionist Kabal and is not to be trusted.

Liberty and R Word!!!

CorporatePiggy on February 14, 2013 at 9:23 PM

Explain to us the virtues of blue State republicans and how they are better than blue state democrats again.

portlandon on February 14, 2013 at 5:39 PM

Like comparing oranges to oranges.

Kent18 on February 14, 2013 at 9:25 PM

Rand’s “Sista Solga” moment?

Count to 10 on February 14, 2013 at 9:25 PM

The word “filibuster” has been used synonymously with “blocking cloture” for years, by the vast majority of political observers. If you wish to use it in a different fashion, then that’s up to you. Presuming that others care about such hairsplitting distinctions simply because you do might be considered “hubris”, in fact.

And who the hell depends on allahpundit to educate them anyway, regardless? Most of us are here so that we can get into meaningless fights with the other commenters.

RINO in Name Only on February 14, 2013 at 7:35 PM

I wasn’t going to bother answering this but your statement that these two words have been synonymous for years. That is simply not true, unless you are referring for years as meaning since the Clinton administration. The words definitely have different meanings, but the conflation of these two words gives ammunition to the press and the progressives, because they can use them to mean anything they want them to mean. They can say the reupub always filibuster and the dems never do, which is not true, but can be convincing when they switch meanings in mid sentence. This is a favorite tactic of the dhimocrapt socialists re-define the language to mean whatever they say it means and use it against you. By accepting this, you have just given yourself a 15 yard penalty on the kickoff. Or, in other words, you can define the word “is” to mean whatever you want.

Old Country Boy on February 14, 2013 at 9:36 PM

Scott McConnell, one of the [American Conservative]’s founding editors, went a step further: “If Rand Paul persists on going demagogic on Hagel, he will have established beyond any serious doubt that regardless of who his father is, he is Bill Kristol and Jennifer Rubin’s boy.”…

Wow. McConnell’s naming of Kristol and Rubin shows he isn’t even trying to hide his anti-jewish bias.

Reno_Dave on February 14, 2013 at 9:39 PM

McConnell’s naming of Kristol and Rubin shows he isn’t even trying to hide his anti-jewish bias.

Reno_Dave on February 14, 2013 at 9:39 PM

It’s very hard to hide it. That’s what this is all about and we all know it.

rrpjr on February 14, 2013 at 9:42 PM

RINO in Name Only on February 14, 2013 at 7:35 PM

In fact your attitude is significantly part of the problem. How many times in the last six years has the senate leadership refused to bring up items for vote unless they could get 60 votes for cloture (to limit debate)? Failure of cloture does not mean filibuster, it only means that more than 20 hours will be allowed to discuss and debate the bill. However, with your support, the media and talking heads say that the republicans are trying to prevent the matter from being debated, when it is Harry Reid that is actually attempting to limit debate – the repubs get blamed. A vote for cloture (no such thing as “blocking cloture”) is a VOTE TO LIMIT DEBATE. When debate is limited, filibusters are not possible, as is much other discussion of the question.

It is bad enough when you guys are redefining our language for political purposes; much worse is redefining our country.

Old Country Boy on February 14, 2013 at 9:52 PM

Alternate headline: “Ronulians riot on Ronulus, tear down statues of Rand”

LOL!

William Eaton on February 14, 2013 at 10:02 PM

Good news for a Valentine’s Day.

If we can get the 40 R’s to hold firm, we have 2 or 3 more votes to keep Hagel from being confirmed…right?

22044 on February 14, 2013 at 10:04 PM

Like comparing oranges to oranges.

Kent18 on February 14, 2013 at 9:25 PM

Your logic has to be digested slowly:-)

bluefox on February 14, 2013 at 10:05 PM

Folks, you are wasting your time, energy, and emotions, on a losing and insignificant battle… Hagel is really bad but not worse than Obama… Hagel or any other Defense secretary will follow Obama orders and hence it is going to be bad no matter who is Defense secretary…

mnjg on February 14, 2013 at 10:07 PM

Hot Airians are on a roll on the Hickenlooper thread, ROFL

bluefox on February 14, 2013 at 10:07 PM

Now would be a perfect time for another internet poll….you know so the Ronulans can express themselves in all their glory.

Predicted outcome….

Ronulans! (in dramatic fashion) What should happen to Rand Paul?

(A)Congratulated for voting against an anti-semitic hippy. (2%)
(B)Shunned for standing in the way of pure isolationism (25%)
(C)Sacrificed Rand at the alter of Runulas Prime (73%)

William Eaton on February 14, 2013 at 10:15 PM

I guess they want a “bigoted hater” just like themselves.

Resist We Much on February 14, 2013 at 9:21 PM

Nope. From the prog’s perspective…Hagel is their token Republican.

Stand back America, there is a new strawman in town.

coldwarrior on February 14, 2013 at 10:19 PM

RINO in Name Only on February 14, 2013 at 7:35 PM

In fact your attitude is significantly part of the problem. How many times in the last six years has the senate leadership refused to bring up items for vote unless they could get 60 votes for cloture (to limit debate)? Failure of cloture does not mean filibuster, it only means that more than 20 hours will be allowed to discuss and debate the bill. However, with your support, the media and talking heads say that the republicans are trying to prevent the matter from being debated, when it is Harry Reid that is actually attempting to limit debate – the repubs get blamed. A vote for cloture (no such thing as “blocking cloture”) is a VOTE TO LIMIT DEBATE. When debate is limited, filibusters are not possible, as is much other discussion of the question.
It is bad enough when you guys are redefining our language for political purposes; much worse is redefining our country.

Old Country Boy on February 14, 2013 at 9:52 PM

Whether or not the media accurately reports the parliamentary maneuverings of Harry Reid has nothing to do with whether they call it a “filibuster” or not. When Bush was in power, they frequently used the word filibuster in the exact same manner they are using it now. Their reporting was ridiculously biased then and now, but the colloquial meaning of the word itself has not changed.

And yes, there most certainly is such a thing as “blocking cloture”. The republicans just did it.

RINO in Name Only on February 14, 2013 at 10:22 PM

Hot Airians are on a roll on the Hickenlooper thread, ROFL

bluefox on February 14, 2013 at 10:07 PM

Hot Airians?

Zat is vat ve called zose vunderful pole dancers at ze old SS gentlemans club in Berlin.

[Well, this is a thread about an anti-Semetic bigot, right?}

coldwarrior on February 14, 2013 at 10:23 PM

Allowing Chuck Hagel to run the defense department would be like giving Ted Kennedy the keys to manage a liquor store at a car dealership. It wouldn’t be long before you were out of business and somebody was killed.

DevilsPrinciple on February 14, 2013 at 10:28 PM

…I was missing a good thread!

KOOLAID2 on February 14, 2013 at 10:28 PM

RWM, you’re indefatigable, and good is it.

Maxine Waters w/b such a good fit to replace Hagel.

The land is a one big shame.

Schadenfreude on February 14, 2013 at 10:35 PM

Hot Airians?

Zat is vat ve called zose vunderful pole dancers at ze old SS gentlemans club in Berlin.

[Well, this is a thread about an anti-Semetic bigot, right?}

coldwarrior on February 14, 2013 at 10:23 PM

I went there & supplied my contribution. :) I think everyone’s moved on.

22044 on February 14, 2013 at 10:38 PM

How come the Swiss are this dumb?

Schadenfreude on February 14, 2013 at 10:39 PM

Herr Doktor and his supporters show their true colors. AGAIN.

riddick on February 14, 2013 at 10:43 PM

Allowing Chuck Hagel to run the defense department would be like giving Ted Kennedy the keys to manage a liquor store at a car dealership. It wouldn’t be long before you were out of business and somebody was killed.

DevilsPrinciple on February 14, 2013 at 10:28 PM

Read the fine print. The hold is only temporary, GOP already stated that Hagel will be approved once they get some hand outs from WH. THEY ALL HAVE A PRICE.

riddick on February 14, 2013 at 10:44 PM

RINO in Name Only on February 14, 2013 at 10:22 PM

Your handle says it all. There is no such thing as a blocking cloture. It appears in no dictionary. It does not appear in Google. I did notice on Google, that the term “blocking” can appear in the same sentence as the word “cloture”. But in every case it is not used as an adjective, but a stand alone verb elsewhere in the sentence, and used by a librul talking head or commenter. And only used in a malicious sense when describing republican actions. Cloture means, in every sense and dictionary, to limit or cut off the discussion. The fact that a filibuster may follow unlimited debate is not part of the meaning. Go back and tell your polisci draft dodging college professor that he is as wrong now as when he started indoctrinating you in the ’60s. Since you are a Republican In Name Only in Name Only, go back to your progressive mentors and educate them.

Old Country Boy on February 14, 2013 at 10:44 PM

Paul shouldn’t have voted no. I don’t think Hagel is worth wasting the political energy on when we have Brennan to deal with and grill about drone strikes and Benghazi. We’re not going to get anyone better than Hagel anyway, let him be Obama’s problem with his comments about Jewish lobbies.

And as for his “Israel Lobby” comments, who cares, let the Democrats explain that. Major miscalculation by Paul here, just look at the sarcasm oozing out of Allah’s post, this vote got him nothing with the neocon crowd.

Daemonocracy on February 14, 2013 at 10:45 PM

And as for his “Israel Lobby” comments, who cares, let the Democrats explain that. Major miscalculation by Paul here, just look at the sarcasm oozing out of Allah’s post, this vote got him nothing with the neocon crowd.

Daemonocracy on February 14, 2013 at 10:45 PM

Big whup it got him nothing, they’ll hate him forever and a day. The Neocon crowd is irrelevant so long as he’s careful not to parrot daddy (or say something too close) and stir up the rabble.

MelonCollie on February 14, 2013 at 10:52 PM

The problem is Hagel, is strongly associated with the Arab lobby, the Julaffis, the Olayans, the Erdogan regime, etc, not to mention
Russia’s puppet in Georgia, Ivanishvilli, A true American nationalist
would look askance at that.

narciso on February 14, 2013 at 11:05 PM

Nope. From the prog’s perspective…Hagel is their token Republican.

Stand back America, there is a new strawman in town.

coldwarrior on February 14, 2013 at 10:19 PM

It was sarcasm.

As for Hagel and his token Republicanism, I’ve made this point repeatedly on this site.

Obama could have nominated Michelle Flournoy, who is a former Under Secretary of Defense for Policy of the United States, worked in the Pentagon, and is infinitely more qualified than Chuck Hagel, who admitted that he is not during his hearing. She is also a Democrat and would have been the first woman SecDef.

Obama wants Hagel, who is far out of the Republican mainstream and is even to the left of Obama on foreign policy. He supports containment. He disapproves of the sanctions that the Obama administration – and others – have put on Iran and North Korea. While Obama may not have the closest relationship with Israel, he, unlike Hagel, has never accused it of “having blood on its hands.” Hagel was the only Senator out of 100 that refused to denounce the anti-Semitism epidemic in Russia. No, Hagel is definitely to the left of Obama on foreign policy.

Why does Obama want Hagel?

He wants Republican cover for what he is planning for the military. He wants to be able to say “No one can possibly disapprove of my common sense solutions to “reform” the military or my approach on foreign policy. My SecDef, Chuck Hagel, is a Republican and completely approves.”

Obama needs to pick a Democrat. I may never have been a Republican nor am I a conservative, but I don’t believe that the GOP should allow Obama to get away with what he wants to do. If he wants to deeply cut the defence budget or arm the Muslim Brotherhood or al-Qaeda-affiliated rebels, as he is currently doing in Syria, then he shouldn’t be allowed to hide behind a token Republican, who is hated by his own party.

He needs to own it and that means a Democrat SecDef.

Resist We Much on February 14, 2013 at 11:05 PM

You’d think Ron Paul’s supporters would support a vote against a blithering idiot.

besser tot als rot on February 14, 2013 at 11:23 PM

Resist We Much on February 14, 2013 at 11:05 PM

Best summation I’ve seen yet of why Hagel.

Clinton did something similar with Bill Cohen back in the 90′s. Picked a Republican to be SecDef. Made that Kosovo thing more easily accepted…was able to mask over the failure of Dayton overall…along with the slash and burn of the defense budget…and a few other things we are still paying for.

coldwarrior on February 14, 2013 at 11:27 PM

Paul shouldn’t have voted no. I don’t think Hagel is worth wasting the political energy on when we have Brennan to deal with and grill about drone strikes and Benghazi.

Daemonocracy on February 14, 2013 at 10:45 PM

No room for voting against complete morons in the libertarian crowd? I thought libertarians appreciated rewarding merit and hard work and not rewarding idiocy and sloth. Hagel getting confirmed is no better than giving a lazy slob welfare.

besser tot als rot on February 14, 2013 at 11:27 PM

RINO in Name Only on February 14, 2013 at 10:22 PM

Your handle says it all. There is no such thing as a blocking cloture. It appears in no dictionary. It does not appear in Google. I did notice on Google, that the term “blocking” can appear in the same sentence as the word “cloture”. But in every case it is not used as an adjective, but a stand alone verb elsewhere in the sentence, and used by a librul talking head or commenter.

I never said there was such thing as a blocking cloture. I said there was such a thing as blocking cloture. Yes, genius, it’s a verb.

The democrats were trying to end debate, via a procedure called “cloture”. The republicans prevented them from doing so. Are you upset that I said “blocking” instead of “preventing”?

Go back and tell your polisci draft dodging college professor that he is as wrong now as when he started indoctrinating you in the ’60s. Since you are a Republican In Name Only in Name Only, go back to your progressive mentors and educate them.

Old Country Boy on February 14, 2013 at 10:44 PM

No one here actually buys your dumbass “everyone I disagree with is a RINO” schtick. That got old a long time ago. We have enough actual RINOs and squishes to deal with without tiresome idiots like you diluting the word by using it every time someone disagrees with you.

RINO in Name Only on February 14, 2013 at 11:33 PM

I never said there was such thing as a blocking cloture.

RINO in Name Only on February 14, 2013 at 11:33 PM

Hmm. Isn’t that like a stroke? Or a pulmonary embolism?

besser tot als rot on February 14, 2013 at 11:42 PM

And yes, there most certainly is such a thing as “blocking cloture”. The republicans just did it.

RINO in Name Only on February 14, 2013 at 10:22 PM

I’d say they voted to continue debate.

besser tot als rot on February 14, 2013 at 11:46 PM

I’d say they voted to continue debate.

besser tot als rot on February 14, 2013 at 11:46 PM

Yes, that’s also true, and there’s nothing wrong with saying it that way. It might even be a better way to phrase it. I just get tired of the constant “How dare you not phrase things the way I think they should be phrased, you RINO scum?” faux outrage from people who just want to impose their own form of political correctness, ostensibly to counter that of the left, by more likely because they are a bunch of control freaks.

RINO in Name Only on February 15, 2013 at 12:31 AM

Reid’s Short Memory on the Filibuster

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid blasted Republican senators for their refusal to support bringing former Nebraska senator Chuck Hagel’s nomination to the floor for an up or down vote. Amidst references to the unprecedented nature of the Republicans’ obstructionist efforts, Reid failed to mention his opposition to a Bush administration cabinet nominee on nearly identical grounds.

“Just when you thought things couldn’t get any worse, it gets worse,” Reid lamented this morning on the Senate floor. “I’m going to call Chuck Hagel when I finish here and say, ‘I’m sorry, sorry this has happened. I’m sorry for the president, I’m sorry for the country, and I’m sorry for you.”

The momentum for a filibuster picked up steam when senators John McCain and Lindsey Graham indicated they would not vote to end debate and allow a vote on the nomination until the White House provided more information on the Benghazi attack. “Chuck Hagel had nothing to do with the attack in Benghazi,” Reid argued.

Former Idaho governor Dirk Kempthorne didn’t have anything to do with the Bush administration’s position on public land sales in Southern Nevada, either. Nonetheless, Reid in 2006 supported a filibuster of Kempthorne’s nomination as secretary of the interior until the administration agreed to redirect funds from an enormously profitable Nevada land management fund, set to go to the Treasury Department, to the state of Nevada.

“I said before that I couldn’t support Governor Kempthorne’s nomination unless we could come to an agreement about key public land issues,” Reid, who said the Senate minority leader at the time, said in a statement. When the Bush administration acceded to Reid’s demands, he declared his support for Kempthorne’s nomination.

Reid today repeatedly decried the GOP’s opposition to Hagel’s nomination, pointing to the historical nature of the alleged obstruction. As it turns out, Kempthorne was the last cabinet nominee to face a filibuster . . . thanks in part to Harry Reid.

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/340768/reids-short-memory-filibuster-eliana-johnson

Resist We Much on February 15, 2013 at 1:39 AM

This pretty much confirms what I have always said. Paulbot are only interested in two things, legal drugs and hating Jews.

The Notorious G.O.P on February 15, 2013 at 2:04 AM

What do Senators Rand Paul, Thomas Coburn, Jim Inhofe, Bernie Sanders, Tom Harkin, Jeff Merkley, and Ron Wyden have in common? They are the FEW who voted AGAINST 0bama’s National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012, aka. the Indefinite Detention’ Defense Bill.

Judge Andrew P. Napolitano commented on S. 1867 last week saying, “It basically says that the President can arrest whoever he wants anywhere in the United States of America, and keep them without charging them for a crime, without letting them see a lawyer, without bringing them to a judge for as long as he wants.

Here in mid June of last year, Michigan began considering a block against any state cooperation with federal officials who wish to detain Americans under sections 1021 and 1022. The bill passed unanimously on December 5, 2012.

We in the TEA Party pushed hard to get that. What have you done lately?

DannoJyd on February 15, 2013 at 2:09 AM

We in the TEA Party pushed hard to get that. What have you done lately?

DannoJyd on February 15, 2013 at 2:09 AM

I’ve begun a personal campaign to purge the conservative movement of tongue-clicking scolds that try to guilt-trip the rest of us into adopting their ideals, candidates, methods, and/or attitudes.

RINO in Name Only on February 15, 2013 at 3:24 AM

I’d say they voted to continue debate.

besser tot als rot on February 14, 2013 at 11:46 PM

Yes, that’s also true, and there’s nothing wrong with saying it that way. It might even be a better way to phrase it. I just get tired of the constant “How dare you not phrase things the way I think they should be phrased, you RINO scum?” faux outrage from people who just want to impose their own form of political correctness, ostensibly to counter that of the left, by more likely because they are a bunch of control freaks.

RINO in Name Only on February 15, 2013 at 12:31 AM

Just so there’s no misunderstanding, the “faux outrage” and “control freaks” remarks were directed at old country boy, not you. I’m not trying to give a hard time to people who just want to be careful how they phrase things, and offer suggestions on how to do it – I just object when people insist on browbeating the rest of us.

RINO in Name Only on February 15, 2013 at 3:33 AM

RINO in Name Only on February 15, 2013 at 3:24 AM

Considering that you do so from the bench you continue to warm, how is that effort[?] working out for you?

Do keep up the good work while I, the AWE inspiring Danno Mann goes to the MIGOP Convention as a CREDENTIALED Delegate to vote for the future leadership of the Michigan GOP.

How proud you must be today.

DannoJyd on February 15, 2013 at 3:44 AM

Comment pages: 1 2 3