• 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!

Senator's Projects Stall Obama Appointees

Blackdog said:
They tried to block every nominee, it did not matter. It was just as disgusting.
Click to expand...

Source?

Telecaster said:
Military expenditures, such as re-fueling and ED analysis, is now considered "pork"?!!?
Click to expand...

When you're trying to stall 89 or so appointees just to get a plum contract given to a foreign company who would build in your state, instead of an American company who would build somewhere else... if it's not pork I'm not sure what to call it. It's not a matter of whether we get these, its whether they go to Alabama or not.
 
Charles Martel said:
Our Constituency in full support and growing, the Party of No says exactly that. The whining going on concerning judicial appointments...is just that. More selective outrage, perhaps the Republicans will submit a letter to Obama "telling" him who we think is an adequate nominee and who isn't. Who would be a tough fight, who would be filibustered immediately, who would be considered, who wouldn't have any trouble whatsoever.

Democrats.com Archive: Judicial appointments

William H. Pryor Jr., William Haynes, Thomas B. Griffith, Paul Crotty, Brett Kavanaugh, William Myers, Charles Pickering, the list goes on not mentioning UN ambassador John Bolton, World Bank rep, and we won't even go to Supreme Court Justices where Democrats have set a new bar in childlike behavior and obstinence.

You refs let the boys and girls play it out on the field, and, don't mind the fickle crowd noise that is selective and kneejerk defensive concerning the current home team.
Click to expand...

Except we're not talking about judicial appointments. We're talking about executive branch appointments.
 
danarhea said:
Actually, during Bush's 2 terms, Harry Reid personally stalled about 48 appointments. Right now, Shelby is stalling about 70 appointments. He and Reid should get together for a beer. They have something in common. They are both douche bags.
Click to expand...

Not possible btw, Reid is a teetotaler.
 
the makeout hobo said:
So you have a senator blocking crucial appointments, many related to national security, to bring a pork project home. On top of that, the GOP leadership is going along with it and helping him. There's something very wrong with this.
Click to expand...

What was wrong it the repeated re-bidding of a project that just refused to go to Boing because Boing's design wasn't good enough.

Also, holding up the Messiah's appointments DOES serve national security.
 
the makeout hobo said:
That they tried to block every nominee bush nominated, regardless of circumstance? Yes. Back that up please.
Click to expand...

As soon as you can point out where I said that.

"They tried to block every nominee, it did not matter. It was just as disgusting. - Blackdog
 
Blackdog said:
As soon as you can point out where I said that.

"They tried to block every nominee, it did not matter. It was just as disgusting. - Blackdog
Click to expand...

Didn't you just restate it? I'm confused what you are asking me to show.
 
Wow, conservatives manage to justify even this. Impressive. Let me summarize.


One Senator is halting the appointment of every single nominee. A "blanket hold," including key national security positions. This man is literally making America less safe.

To override him requires a cloture vote: 60 votes to invoke cloture, which starts a 30-hour clock in which no other Senate business can be attended to. EACH appointment would require a cloture vote, so you'd need Republicans to get on board and vote in favor of cloture (no easy task, they've yet to vote in favor of ANYTHING the democrats have tried to do) and it would have to be done 70 times.

70 * 30 hours = almost 3 months, and that's assuming you have the Senate run 24/7. In reality, we're talking about closer to six months of completely halting the passing of any sort of legislation in this country.

You see, once cloture is invoked, YOU CAN'T DISCUSS ANYTHING ELSE BUT THAT ONE ISSUE. This man is holding the entire government hostage and it takes literally every Republican vote to stand with him for him to be successful.

No one man is the 41st vote. All of them are. The entire GOP presence in the Senate is just as guilty.
 
the makeout hobo said:
So you have a senator blocking crucial appointments, many related to national security, to bring a pork project home. On top of that, the GOP leadership is going along with it and helping him. There's something very wrong with this.
Click to expand...

Yeah its almost like Senators Landrieu and Nelson taking bribes for their vote on the health plan................
 
I can't believe you guys are arguing over judicial appointees being blocked by Senators on one side or another. You know what? BOTH SIDES DO IT. And the people get frakked over because of it.
 
samsmart said:
I can't believe you guys are arguing over judicial appointees being blocked by Senators on one side or another. You know what? BOTH SIDES DO IT. And the people get frakked over because of it.
Click to expand...

This was exactly my point.

Thanks.
 
samsmart said:
I can't believe you guys are arguing over judicial appointees being blocked by Senators on one side or another. You know what? BOTH SIDES DO IT. And the people get frakked over because of it.
Click to expand...

I think they call that the spoils of having a majority in the senate and a president on your side...........The problems for the dems is the two justices leaving next are both Liberals so if Obama is in charge the status quo will remain......If a republican some how gets in and the power in the senate changes then conservative will be nominated.......
 
Navy Pride said:
Yeah its almost like Senators Landrieu and Nelson taking bribes for their vote on the health plan................
Click to expand...
Thats typically how the senate works. Senators giving votes for pork
 
Navy Pride said:
This was not pork...this was a bribe...........You did not even know about it?
Click to expand...

Pork. Its common for senators to get things for their district for their vote. Nothing was personally given to her. That would be a bribe.
 
PogueMoran said:
Pork. Its common for senators to get things for their district for their vote. Nothing was personally given to her. That would be a bribe.
Click to expand...

They don't get those 2 votes there is no health bill.........You have to be the most partisan person in DP or the most naive......:roll:
 
reefedjib said:
I have seen Democrats do this during the Bush years. They had best give Shelby what he wants, especially on the earmark.
Click to expand...

Shelby needs to be removed from office. He's a nazi dickhead.
 
Navy Pride said:
Yeah its almost like Senators Landrieu and Nelson taking bribes for their vote on the health plan................
Click to expand...

So are you saying both situations are OK, or that both are wrong? Which is it?

samsmart said:
I can't believe you guys are arguing over judicial appointees being blocked by Senators on one side or another. You know what? BOTH SIDES DO IT. And the people get frakked over because of it.
Click to expand...

Dude, read the article. We're not talking about judicial appointments. We're talking about a wide swath of various executive branch appointments that the GOP and Shelby have no actual issues with. If he had an issue with these nominees, it wouldn't be a big deal. But that isn't the case. He's using them as hostages to get a contract for his state. See the difference?
 
Navy Pride said:
They don't get those 2 votes there is no health bill.........You have to be the most partisan person in DP or the most naive......:roll:
Click to expand...
No not everyone is as partisan as you are NP. Not naive either; I recognize what this actually is. This is the same stuff congress has been doing for years. If it was those 2 votes there would have been a health care bill. Obviously not the case but way to derail the thread.
 
the makeout hobo said:
So are you saying both situations are OK, or that both are wrong? Which is it?


Dude, read the article. We're not talking about judicial appointments. We're talking about a wide swath of various executive branch appointments that the GOP and Shelby have no actual issues with. If he had an issue with these nominees, it wouldn't be a big deal. But that isn't the case. He's using them as hostages to get a contract for his state. See the difference?
Click to expand...

I am against all earmarks and bribes...........
 
Today, the U.S. Senate seems determined to make the Sejm look good by comparison.

Last week, after nine months, the Senate finally approved Martha Johnson to head the General Services Administration, which runs government buildings and purchases supplies. It’s an essentially nonpolitical position, and nobody questioned Ms. Johnson’s qualifications: she was approved by a vote of 94 to 2. But Senator Christopher Bond, Republican of Missouri, had put a “hold” on her appointment to pressure the government into approving a building project in Kansas City.

This dubious achievement may have inspired Senator Richard Shelby, Republican of Alabama. In any case, Mr. Shelby has now placed a hold on all outstanding Obama administration nominations — about 70 high-level government positions — until his state gets a tanker contract and a counterterrorism center.

What gives individual senators this kind of power? Much of the Senate’s business relies on unanimous consent: it’s difficult to get anything done unless everyone agrees on procedure. And a tradition has grown up under which senators, in return for not gumming up everything, get the right to block nominees they don’t like.

In the past, holds were used sparingly. That’s because, as a Congressional Research Service report on the practice says, the Senate used to be ruled by “traditions of comity, courtesy, reciprocity, and accommodation.” But that was then. Rules that used to be workable have become crippling now that one of the nation’s major political parties has descended into nihilism, seeing no harm — in fact, political dividends — in making the nation ungovernable.

How bad is it? It’s so bad that I miss Newt Gingrich.
Click to expand...

Op-Ed Columnist - America Is Not Yet Lost - NYTimes.com

I found this editorial interesting in conjunction with the OP.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom