Hagel: I’m not withdrawing despite filibuster

Ah…no, that’s not it.

verbaluce on February 14, 2013 at 1:38 PM

Um, yes, it is.

Remember when attending 5 colleges and maintaining a “C” average was proof that someone wasn’t fit for high office?

Well, Obama has nominated a man, who attended 5 colleges and had a “D” average.

Remember when being openly homophobic was a cause for scorn by the Left?

Well, Obama has nominated a man, who has been openly homophobic.

Remember when opposing abortion even in the case of rape was considered a disqualification for office by the Left, a bar to even addressing the Democratic National Convention, and proof of the “Republican’s War on Women”?

Well, Obama has nominated a man, who opposes abortion even in the case of rape.

Remember when making anti-Semitic statements, rightfully, drew comparisons to David Duke?

Well, Obama has nominated a man, who has made anti-Semitic statements on numerous occasions.

Remember when “smart power” was what the media and the Left called Obama’s foreign policy and his team?

Well, Obama has nominated a man, who has proven that he is anything but smart.

Remember when the Left spit on returning troops from Vietnam and your Secretary of State, falsely, testified under oath about how horrible American soldiers were behaving in Vietnam – much worse than the lie that Jack Murtha told?

Well, Obama has nominated a man, who the Left once accused of atrocities.

Remember when people, who voted for the Iraq War, were called warmongers and alleged to be supportive of “air-raiding villages and killing civilians”?

Well, Obama has nominated a man that the Left once called a “warmonger.”

Look, we know the deal here. Obama wants Hagel so that he has Republican cover to do what he wants to do to the military.

Resist We Much on February 14, 2013 at 1:53 PM

…where he acted stupider than the stupidest member of the Congressional Black Caucus.

sentinelrules on February 14, 2013 at 1:42 PM

Dude, you have issues.

verbaluce on February 14, 2013 at 1:47 PM

Yeah, ‘cuz everyone knows that Sheila Jackson-Lee*, Hank Johnson, Maxine Waters, John Conyers, etc, along with former CBC member, Cynthia McKinney**, are all Mensa members.

* A few of her greatest hits:

1.

“Did the Mars Rover take any images of the flag Neil Armstrong planted on Mars?”

- Sheila “Weapons Grade Stupid” Jackson-Lee, which caused her colleague, Vernon Ehlers, to sigh and state, “We don’t teach enough science in this country.”

2.

“Hurricane names are too ‘lily-white’. All racial groups should be represented and federal weather officials should try to be inclusive of African-American names.”

- Sheila “But, You’d Better Not Give Any Cat 4s or 5s African Names Because That Would Be Racist” Jackson-Lee

3.

“All those who wore sheets a long time ago have now lifted them off and started wearing [applause], uh, clothing, uh, with a name, say, I am part of the tea party.”

- Sheila “I See Racists Everywhere Except When They Are Robert Byrd Democrats” Jackson-Lee

4.

“I am so glad that we won the Vietnam War. Today, we have two Vietnams, side by side, North and South, exchanging and working. We may not agree with all that North Vietnam is doing, but they are living in peace.”

- Sheila “Dora the Explorer” Jackson-Lee

5.

“I am a queen, and I demand to be treated like a queen.”

- Sheila “Queen of Racism” Jackson-Lee to a staffer

6.

“What am I a prostitute? Am I your prostitute? You can’t prostitute me.”

- Sheila “I Ain’t No ‘Ho” Jackson-Lee, according to her staff

7.

“Don’t you let them tell you that Congresswoman Jackson-Lee’s braids are too tight in her hair and that has something to do with justice and equality and empowerment of the American people. Don’t let them fool you on that [applause].”

** A few of her greatest hits:

1. Tried to pass a bill to release the government’s secret records on all of the Jews on House committees.

2. Assaulted the Capitol police.

3. Tried to get a new House Senate Select Committee On Assassinations formed to investigate the CIA’s involvement into the “assassinations” of Tupac Shakur, Soulja Slim, Biggie Smalls, Freakie Tay, Mac Dre, Yaki Kadafi, Scott La Rock, Big L, and Jam Master Jay.

4. Claimed that the government executed 5,000 males and dumped them in a swamp in Louisiana.

5. Claimed that the American Red Cross was a conspirator in the “genocide” in Louisiana. (Yeah, ‘cuz EVERYONE knows that the Red Cross is just a beard for the Fourth Reich, Illuminati, Council on Foreign Relations, CIA and Bilderbergs. That’s right! We ALL know that its charity work is just a cover for its real purpose: To steal and kill.)

6. 9/11 Truther (thermite…nano-thermite…nono-kryptonite)

TOTALLY BATSHIT CRAZY: THE SIX MOST INSANE PEOPLE TO EVER RUN FOR PRESIDENT

Are You Smarter Than A Politician? Probably.

Resist We Much on February 14, 2013 at 2:02 PM

Again…as I said before, Repubs are not hiding the ‘why’ here at all.
And it’s not any of the concerns that you offered.
They said they are doing this until they get ‘answers on Benghazi’.
I suppose as soon as the WH tells Lindsay Graham whether or not Obama spoke with Libyans – (and how many…for how long…at what time…and where was he…what was he wearing…phone on right or left ear…feet up or standing?) – well then he’ll just move right to a vote on all of this?
Sure.

verbaluce on February 14, 2013 at 2:03 PM

Er, you might wish to go back and educate yourself. There has been talk of filibustering Hagan for months – and the bases for which have included many of the things that I wrote.

In fact, if you want, I’ll provide you with some examples.

Theater…plain and simple.

As is the demand for Benghazi ‘answers’.

Er, I think that the American people have a RIGHT TO KNOW that their Commander-in-Chief was AWOL and went to bed after being told that Ambassador Stevens was missing and there was an ongoing assault.

That’s FAR worse than Bush finishing “My Pet Goat” to a class of kindergarteners.

We also deserve the truth on the gun-running and, yes, it is happening. I wrote about it on numerous occasions some time back, including this:

Obama sent for the Seals that killed Osama. They did their job. We know what happened to them.

When Ambassador Stevens, Sean Smith and 2 former Seals, Tyrone Woods and Glenn Dougherty, called for help, Obama did NOTHING.

Chris Stevens was meeting with the Turkish Consul General Ali Sait Akin in Benghazi on the night of his death. Turkey was not pleased that both Qaddafi and American-made weapons, including Stingers, were making their way to the al Qaeda-affiliated rebels in Syria. Neither were the Russians and Iranians, who are on the side of the Assad regime.

5 days before the attack, a Libyan ship, the Entisa, linked with Al-Qaeda jihadists like Abdelhakim Belhadj had Stingers and other weapons onboard. The purpose was to get weapons into the hands of Syrian jihadists, known to be dominated by Al-Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood.

This ship was stopped at the Turkish port of Iskanderun, 35 miles from the Syrian border. They did not want the weapons going forward into Syria, but high-ranking US officials pleaded. The transport was released under duress.

The following week, Stevens was assassinated. There are 4 groups that do not want a Fast & Furious for Syria: The Turks, The Syrians, The Iranians, and The Russians.

Mr Obama may wish to watch his own back considering the Frankenstein he created.

Karma is such a vengeful bytch.

8 November 2011

Yes, we definitely deserve the truth and demanding such is not theater. I remember when there was an entire commission set up to investigate the first 9/11.

Resist We Much on February 14, 2013 at 2:29 PM

Rules allow them to filibuster just because they have a hair across their a$s.
Wait…nevermind.

verbaluce on February 14, 2013 at 2:15 PM

Are you referring to John Bolton’s nomination to be Ambassador to the United Nations?

The Senate yesterday failed to break a Democrat-led filibuster against President Bush’s nominee for ambassador to the United Nations, leaving John R. Bolton at an impasse and setting up the possibility of a recess appointment.

The vote was 54-38, six votes shy of the total needed to end a filibuster and force an up-or-down vote on Mr. Bolton, and both sides said they do not see an end to the impasse.

Democrats said the issue is no longer Mr. Bolton, but an institutional fight with the administration over access to names from foreign communications intercepts.

Resist We Much on February 14, 2013 at 2:32 PM

Democrats said the issue is no longer Mr. Bolton, but an institutional fight with the administration over access to names from foreign communications intercepts.

Resist We Much on February 14, 2013 at 2:32 PM

But that’s different.

Chuck Schick on February 14, 2013 at 2:34 PM

BUT, OF COURSE…

Resist We Much on February 14, 2013 at 2:38 PM

Ah…not really accurate –
(You put a period where there should be a comma…simple error…yes?)

verbaluce on February 14, 2013 at 2:48 PM

Yes

Democrats said the issue is no longer Mr. Bolton, but an institutional fight with the administration over access to names from foreign communications intercepts, which Democrats want to see to determine whether Mr. Bolton was trying to bully analysts.

Either the issue was John Bolton or it wasn’t.

Filibustering Bolton

“Yes, filibuster Bolton!”

Tales of Two Filibusters: The Judges & John Bolton

Democrats Extend Debate On Bolton

By Charles Babington
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, May 27, 2005

Senate Democrats refused to end debate on John R. Bolton’s nomination to be U.N. ambassador yesterday, extending the contentious issue into next month and angering Republicans only three days after many had heralded a bipartisan breakthrough on judicial nominees.

…

Democrats said they launched the delaying tactic only as a means of pressuring the Bush administration to provide documents related to Bolton’s handling of classified information and his role in preparing congressional testimony about Syria in 2003. They rejected the administration’s argument that some of the requested information is not relevant to the confirmation debate.

…

Sen. Norm Coleman (R-Minn.) told reporters that Democratic leaders had assured Frist that he would get 60 votes to end debate if he tried. But Reid spokesman Jim Manley said the Democratic leader “told Senator Frist this afternoon he did not have the 60 votes needed, and urged him to consider holding off on the vote” while Biden and others pressed the administration for the requested documents.

He rejected Democratic complaints that they did not have enough information. “They have what they need,” McClellan said.

Biden said yesterday’s vote was meant “to tell the administration that they cannot dictate to the United States Senate.”

“Maybe they’ll take notice,” Biden added. “But the administration is so arrogant, you can’t be sure.”

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/05/26/AR2005052601910_2.html

The same can certainly be said about this administration, which has arrogantly made “recess” appointments when the Senate could not possibly be in recess pursuant to Article I, Section 5, Clause 4, the Adjournments Clause, of the Constitution. Your guy has no respect for separation of powers and he was, rightfully, slapped down by the DC Ap Ct. He will lose if he appeals to the Supreme Court, too.

Democrats filibustered Bolton. They wanted more documents.

Republicans are filibustering Hagel. They want more documents, including the transcripts of his speeches and the amount of money he received from foreign groups.

Turnabout is fair play. Get used to it.

Resist We Much on February 14, 2013 at 3:27 PM

Well, not a different angle. But RWM offered a false ‘same behavior’ example…and you high fived her for it. So…Match point for me on that one!

verbaluce on February 14, 2013 at 3:03 PM

Er, wrong. Either the issue was Bolton or it wasn’t. Democrats said:

Democrats said the issue is no longer Mr. Bolton, but an institutional fight with the administration over access to names from foreign communications intercepts, which Democrats want to see to determine whether Mr. Bolton was trying to bully analysts.

“Repubs are behaving differently here than the Dems did with Bolton. Dang facts. It’s not ‘both sides’.”

Er, wrong. Dang facts.

Resist We Much on February 14, 2013 at 3:30 PM

Why were they were filibustering? Was it because they were ‘demanding answers’ on an issue that did not involve John Bolton? RWM – I’m not saying they can’t do this.

verbaluce on February 14, 2013 at 2:42 PM

Um, they said it wasn’t about Bolton. They wanted documents, which included Bolton, but the scope of the demand went beyond him.

My point is that they remain the party of perpetual outrage and obstruction. In fact, their ‘outrage’ is just another device to obstruct.

They have a right to demand documents. They have a right to demand the White House answer questions and turn over documents related to Benghazi. If the WH will not do it in the normal course of business, then they have a right to filibuster.

As for “perpetual outrage,” I seem to recall that there wasn’t ANYTHING that Bush did that failed to raise the outrage of Democrats.

I remember your party calling Bush a liar, unpatriotic, a traitor (“He betrayed this country!!!”). So, puhlease, save it with your “both parties don’t do this” shit.

And they admit that…and Ed acknowledges it.

They have not admitted that they are filibustering simply to obstruct and, if Ed “acknowledged” that, then he is incorrect.

We can continue to examine other filibusters waged by Democrats…if you’d like.

Resist We Much on February 14, 2013 at 3:46 PM

Relating to Bolton…to determine something about…Bolton.
If you wanna say that’s wrong, ok.
But you’re saying it’s the same thing – and it’s not.
Pretty simple.

(fixed)

verbaluce on February 14, 2013 at 3:57 PM

They wanted more than just documents about Bolton.

Republicans want documents – too – about Hagel, which he has refused to turn over.

Now, should we talk about John Tower?

Resist We Much on February 14, 2013 at 4:53 PM

Verbaluce:

What was your position when Democrats rejected the nomination 53-47 for Secretary of Defence of a newly-elected President, GHW Bush, in 1989? Senator John Tower’s nomination to become Secretary of Defence was the first time that the Senate had rejected a cabinet nominee of a newly elected president.

The post of Secretary of Defence was left vacant for 3 months.

What was your position when Democrats filibustered Miguel Estrada, who had received a unanimous “well-qualified” rating from the American Bar Association (which is not a conservative or even libertarian-leading organisation. I know. I have been a member.)?

“On March 6, 2003, there was the first of seven failed cloture votes on Estrada. Fifty-five senators voted to end debate on his nomination and allow a final confirmation vote, and forty-four senators voted not to end debate. After twenty-eight months in political limbo and a protracted six-month battle using the filibuster, Estrada withdrew his name from further consideration on September 4, 2003.”

Resist We Much on February 14, 2013 at 5:16 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 9:08 PM

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 1:41 AM