• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Obama expected to nominate Loretta Lynch to be attorney general: CNN

NIMBY said:
Mayor Guiliani just made a good case for her being approved on Hannity--she's a life-long prosecutor as one point.
I can't disagree with his points though that the new Senate should approve her, taking away the "stain" of being approved by losing DEM Senators.

Gov. Walker next but I won't be able to watch West/Palin .
Click to expand...

Well, the Senate has already approved her twice before I think I heard earlier...
 
Perotista said:
I haven't the faintest idea who she is. But if the president wants her he probably should have her. That is unless she has something horrendous in her past. When it comes to cabinet positions I believe any president should have whom he wants. After all, whom he chooses reflects directly upon him. Besides any cabinet member is going to do exactly what the president wishes anyway.

Judges are a different deal.
Click to expand...

It is my understanding she has been confirmed twice before by Congress for other posts, so other then her connection to Holder, which is a huge negative, she should breeze through this time as well.
 
OK so his first AG was a black male and the second will be a black female. Which box will he check next if she doesn't work out.

Personally I think it is good she is a woman, at least the government can save money on her salary. I assume she will be paid less than Holder is being paid, after all that is what happens in this administration.
 
Fearandloathing said:
Which I suspect will be the case...however, Harry is just stupid enough to make a fight of it. Were I strategizing for the Republicans I would make a minor fight of it while shrieking "see, they don't learn, they won't co-operate".

Then, when they start hammering the Dems with the Nuclear option Reid handed them they can say "we have no other alternative..."
Click to expand...

The most thoughtful answer I have seen so far on this thread.
 
BrewerBob said:
:) While I certainly believe much of what TSA does is theater I do see a difference between being searched in order to board a plane and cops stopping people on the street for random searches.
Click to expand...

Really? You don't see that both use exactly the same rationale? In order to "keep us safe" we must allow the gov't to stop and search anyone that they wish, without any probable cause or warrant what so ever. We have laws that say what cannot be brought on board and aircraft and we have laws on what may not be carried on the street - you allow "just in case" searches only to protect the airline industry but not to protect the general public?
 
j-mac said:
Don't know much about her...No one can be as corrupt as Holder...But we'll see.
Click to expand...

Mornin' JMac. :2wave: She is real close to Holder.....good friends. Trusted confidant. She also has been advising Holder all thru his time. Which should help some to understand what she is about.

The Repubs wont put up much of a fight over it.....its who BO wants on his team.
 
Mason66 said:
It is my understanding she has been confirmed twice before by Congress for other posts, so other then her connection to Holder, which is a huge negative, she should breeze through this time as well.
Click to expand...

Then apparently the only question left is will the president send her name forth in the lame duck or wait until after the first of the year? Then outside of the very partisan few, does it really make a difference?
 
Perotista said:
Then apparently the only question left is will the president send her name forth in the lame duck or wait until after the first of the year? Then outside of the very partisan few, does it really make a difference?
Click to expand...

Mornin' Pero. :2wave: He is Officially announcing today from the Roosevelt room. ;)
 
MMC said:
Mornin' Pero. :2wave: He is Officially announcing today from the Roosevelt room. ;)
Click to expand...

That's fine. She will follow in Holder's footstep thinking the AG position is to protect and defend the administration instead of being the head lawman of the country. The name doesn't matter who occupies the position, this is just the way it is. It has been that way more or less depending on the president and the person who occupies the position since at least RFK was JFK AG.

Appoint her and move on. Whoever occupies the AG position is going to do whatever the president wants anyway.
 
MMC said:
Mornin' JMac. :2wave: She is real close to Holder.....good friends. Trusted confidant. She also has been advising Holder all thru his time. Which should help some to understand what she is about.

The Repubs wont put up much of a fight over it.....its who BO wants on his team.
Click to expand...

And he should be able to pick his own team...If he wants to go down being the first black President that spoke a good game about race relations, but in action turned his DoJ into little more than a corrupt cover agency, and henchman for labeling everything they get caught at as racism, then so be it...

Obama has two years left, and my view at least early on going into this is that unlike other Presidents at his time frame, (Clinton, Bush jr.) Obama will NOT work with the majority to soften his legacy. In fact, I suspect that now is when he will 'step on the gas' so to speak, and ramp up his brand of lawless rule, and dare this new majority with its all but feckless leadership to do something to him...I hope for the country's sake that isn't true, but we will see.
 
j-mac said:
And he should be able to pick his own team...If he wants to go down being the first black President that spoke a good game about race relations, but in action turned his DoJ into little more than a corrupt cover agency, and henchman for labeling everything they get caught at as racism, then so be it...

Obama has two years left, and my view at least early on going into this is that unlike other Presidents at his time frame, (Clinton, Bush jr.) Obama will NOT work with the majority to soften his legacy. In fact, I suspect that now is when he will 'step on the gas' so to speak, and ramp up his brand of lawless rule, and dare this new majority with its all but feckless leadership to do something to him...I hope for the country's sake that isn't true, but we will see.
Click to expand...


He wont be like Bill Clinton and try to work things out.....he would rather fight Republicans, on all he can. Keep the country divided.

I figured his first thought was they will come after my special package, and money maker for me. That he would be defensive about things. But in order for BO to understand what can be done to him he needs to see some action before the understanding sets in thru his grey matter. Just sayin.

http://www.debatepolitics.com/us-pa...gration-dispute-erupts-white-house-lunch.html
 
MMC said:
He wont be like Bill Clinton and try to work things out.....he would rather fight Republicans, on all he can. Keep the country divided.

I figured his first thought was they will come after my special package, and money maker for me. That he would be defensive about things. But in order for BO to understand what can be done to him he needs to see some action before the understanding sets in thru his grey matter. Just sayin.

http://www.debatepolitics.com/us-pa...gration-dispute-erupts-white-house-lunch.html
Click to expand...

I think that's right, but unfortunately we have Boehner, and McConnell out front right now, and they came out of the gate misreading what the voters were saying....

"Fresh from his own re-election victory and his party’s powerful showing nationwide, Senator Mitch McConnell on Wednesday pledged to break the stalemate in Washington as newly empowered congressional Republicans moved quickly to demonstrate that they can get things done. “We’re going to pass legislation,” Mr. McConnell said at a news conference in Louisville, Ky. “This gridlock and dysfunction can be ended.”

Despite their new majority in the Senate and an expanded one in the House, Republicans face multiple difficulties, not the least of which are internal divisions. But they say they know they have to deliver or face a backlash in 2016.

“I think it really becomes important to appear to want to be a governing party rather than a complaining party,” said Senator Roy Blunt of Missouri, a member of the party leadership. “My belief is we have about six months before the American people check that box one way or the other.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/06/u...ast-in-promoting-agenda-in-congress.html?_r=0

What a bunch of buffoons....They come out giving Demo's the roadmap for making them look incompetent, and all but say that they won't hold the lawlessness of this administration accountable in favor of "getting things done"....My God! We want them to stop doing things! Every time they do they screw it up!
 
j-mac said:
I think that's right, but unfortunately we have Boehner, and McConnell out front right now, and they came out of the gate misreading what the voters were saying....

"Fresh from his own re-election victory and his party’s powerful showing nationwide, Senator Mitch McConnell on Wednesday pledged to break the stalemate in Washington as newly empowered congressional Republicans moved quickly to demonstrate that they can get things done. “We’re going to pass legislation,” Mr. McConnell said at a news conference in Louisville, Ky. “This gridlock and dysfunction can be ended.”

Despite their new majority in the Senate and an expanded one in the House, Republicans face multiple difficulties, not the least of which are internal divisions. But they say they know they have to deliver or face a backlash in 2016.

“I think it really becomes important to appear to want to be a governing party rather than a complaining party,” said Senator Roy Blunt of Missouri, a member of the party leadership. “My belief is we have about six months before the American people check that box one way or the other.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/06/u...ast-in-promoting-agenda-in-congress.html?_r=0

What a bunch of buffoons....They come out giving Demo's the roadmap for making them look incompetent, and all but say that they won't hold the lawlessness of this administration accountable in favor of "getting things done"....My God! We want them to stop doing things! Every time they do they screw it up!
Click to expand...



Lynch was picked as she will fight for BO. To cover BO's ass. Not the American People.
 
a351 said:
Is this really a difficult concept to grasp? She stated that it's a tool that has its uses, but can also be abused, therefore, the usefullness and appropriateness is largely dependent on the officer in questions's motives. Simple stuff really.
Click to expand...

Give the police, or any other agency of the government, powers prohibited by the Constitution, and some of their agents will abuse those powers. It really is simple stuff.
 
EnigmaO01 said:
Get ready for a firestorm from the right wing congress. Or maybe they'll let this one slide so it won't be so obvious that they still will not work with the president.
Click to expand...

Well! Thats a decisive response. Kinda managed to cover both bets, didnt you? The GOP will oppose it (only because they hate OBama and NOT based on the candidate). Unless...they DONT oppose it.

BTW...I know the nomination hasnt actually been made yet...but prior to an article offered 24 hours ago, what do you KNOW about the candidate (beyond what you have been spoon fed to date), and do you think it is a good choice?
 
EnigmaO01 said:
Seriously? Where have you been the last 6 years?
Click to expand...
Are you referring to the fact that 'qualification' has nothing to do with administrative nominees? Or was there another point?

Big fan of Holders were you and the expansion of government powers over US citizens?
 
US Conservative said:
Im getting real tired of the orwellian statements made by Obama's white house, and his potential appointees.
Click to expand...

You're "getting tired?" Dude you've disliked the president before he even got into office.
 
cpwill said:
For this administration? Yup. We got word as soon as Holder said he was stepping down that they were looking for a black woman. Not a great jurist. not someone who could impartially apply the law. Not someone who could restore any kind of trust in a politicized Justice Department. A black woman.

Because just like SCOTUS appointments, that's what's important :roll:
Click to expand...

So it's important to you they are not black as heaven forbid there's no way a black person can be qualified.
 
I didn't know anything at all about Loretta Lynch, so I Googled. She is a U.S. Attorney who was nominated by Obama who has overseen federal prosecutions in Brooklyn, Queens, Long Island, and Staten Island, and she has experience in prosecuting police officers. Am. Lit./English degree from Harvard, ditto her J.D. Loretta Lynch - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
cpwill said:
For this administration? Yup. We got word as soon as Holder said he was stepping down that they were looking for a black woman. Not a great jurist. not someone who could impartially apply the law. Not someone who could restore any kind of trust in a politicized Justice Department. A black woman.

Because just like SCOTUS appointments, that's what's important :roll:
Click to expand...

Are you saying there aren't black women who are qualified for this job, or does it have to be a white man? I think you are just showing your true colors.
 
TurtleDude said:
she is the same class as I was (1984) back then affirmative action at Harvard law was out of control. NONE of the blacks who were accepted at Harvard for the class of 1984 were as qualified as at least 2000 white males who were turned down at that school

back then blacks got .5 added to their GPA and 130 points added to their LSAT scores
Click to expand...

Those grapes must be very sour.
 
Great, another Attorney General with close ties to the financial sector.
 
EnigmaO01 said:
You're "getting tired?" Dude you've disliked the president before he even got into office.
Click to expand...

That is what bigots do. Of course I'm saying this in general terms, all posters here are not bigots, but it does play well with our right-wing nuts here.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom