E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSSenate Republican leader Mitch McConnell is threatening to filibuster Chuck Hagel’s nomination to become Defense Secretary.
If he goes through with it, a move unclear to have enough Republican support to be successful, it would be historic. No cabinet-level nominee has been rejected because of a filibuster, and only two have been required to attain the 60 votes necessary to overcome a filibuster -- Dirk Kempthorne, President George W. Bush's nominee for Interior Secretary in 2006 and C. William Verity, Ronald Reagan's choice for Commerce Secretary. Both were easily overcame the filibuster, 85-8.
“It’s unclear yet,” McConnell told reporters in Kentucky when asked if his party would attempt a filibuster, forcing Hagel to need 60 votes for nomination. Currently, Democrats control the chamber with 55 seats.
“Sen. Hagel did not do a very good job before the Armed Services Committee this week. I think the opposition to him is intensifying. Whether that means he will end up having to achieve 60 votes or 51 is not clear yet.”
Cloture, the vote to end debate and overcome a filibuster, was withdrawn in the case of President's Obama's pick to be Labor secretary, Hilda Solis, as well as President George W. Bush's nominee to be EPA administrator Michael Leavitt. It was also "vitiated" for Rob Portman to become U.S. Trade represenative under Bush, according to the Congressional Research Service.
Plenty of others have been thwarted and one was even voted down since 1975 when the filibuster, requiring 60 votes, was introduced, according to lists provided by Don Ritchie, the Senate historian. That was George H.W. Bush’s Defense Secretary nominee John Tower, a former senator from Texas, who was accused of womanizing (he was married twice) and drinking to the point of alcoholism (he admitted he “drank to excess,” but, “I wouldn’t say I had a problem.”).
Before the Senate vote on his nomination, Tower even went on TV vowing not to drink as Defense Secretary or he would resign.
“Let me state that I have never been an alcoholic or dependent on alcohol,” Tower said in a statement distributed to the press and signed by his doctor. “I hearby swear and undertake that if confirmed, during the course of my tenure as secretary of defense, I will not consume beverage alcohol of any type or form, including wine, beer or spirits of any kind. I think I’d be obliged to resign if I broke the pledge. I’ve never broken a pledge in my life.”
In the end, Tower’s nomination was defeated 53-47. Ironically, the men leading the charge for and against Tower -- former Sens. John Warner (R-VA) and Sam Nunn (D-GA), respectively -- flanked Hagel at his confirmation hearing to urge his confirmation.
“There have been cabinet nominees rejected by the Senate, where there was a vote taken and gone down to defeat,” Ritchie said. “Some were withdrawn by the president because of opposition.”
Other, non-cabinet-level nominees were not able to overcome a filibuster, including John Bolton to be ambassador to the United Nations, a position President Obama now considers "cabinet-level."
There have been nine people nominated for a cabinet post who were voted on and formally rejected by the U.S. Senate, according to the Senate Historical Office. Tower’s, however, was the first since 1959 when Dwight Eisenhower’s pick to be Commerce secretary, Lewis Strauss, failed 49-46.
Prior to that, just one other person was rejected in the 20th Century. In fact, Charles B. Warren, Calvin Coolidge’s nominee to head the Justice Department has the distinction of being the only person in history rejected twice, first by a 41-39 vote. Coolidge then renominated him two days later only to see Warren rejected again by an even wider 46-39 margin just four days after being renominated.
The other six rejected nominees were all in the 19th Century.
Some nominees have been withdrawn by presidents. There have been 21 nominees withdrawn by presidents, most recently former Sen. Tom Daschle, who was President Obama’s pick to head Health and Human Services in 2009; Bernard Kerik, George W. Bush’s nominee for Homeland Security in 2004; and Linda Chavez, Labor, under Bush in 2001.
President Bill Clinton withdrew three nominees -- for attorney general, director of the CIA, and Veterans Affairs.
Prior to that, a nominee hadn’t been withdrawn since Lyndon B. Johnson’s administration in 1969.
Whether Republicans would have the votes to successfully filibuster Hagel and prevent his confirmation is an open question, however.
So far, every Democrat, plus two Republicans (Thad Cochran of Mississippi and Mike Johanns of Nebraska) seem likely to vote for Hagel, giving him 57 votes.
Plus, so far, Republicans Roy Blunt of Missouri and John McCain of Arizona have said they oppose Hagel, but would not support a filibuster to block an up-or-down vote on his confirmation.
McCain had one of the sharpest exchanges of Hagel’s confirmation hearing last week before the Armed Services Committee over the surge in Iraq. (Hagel and McCain, both Vietnam veterans, had been friends before Hagel opposed the surge proposed by McCain.)
Despite that exchange, McCain told Politico Monday, “I just do not believe a filibuster is appropriate, and I would oppose such a move. … I will try to make that argument to my colleagues.”
CORRECTION: An earlier version of this post incorrectly stated, based on information from the Senate Historian's Office, that no cabinet-level nominee had been formally filibustered. There were two prior cases, however, in which cloture was invoked and there was a vote.
Leave a Comment:
Really!!!!! I never saw that coming!! You could knock me over with a feather right about now (wink, wink).
A round of applause for Harry Reid. (sarcasm)
AG, while I understand the point and certainly agree a rules change is necessary, Harry Reid didn't have the 51 votes needed to pass the big filibuster reform most of us wanted. He just didn't so it is unfair to blame him for it. There's some old-school dems in the Senate who cling to tradition. Iowa's Tom Harkin has been trying to reform the filibuster since he first was elected as a Senator; he's one of the older guys who thinks the filibuster tradition needs a good polishing to remove the tarnish.
Based on this???
No kidding he didn't do a very good job as all the "Committee" did was drill him about every statement he's ever said in his life in the PAST. Not one asked about his direction for the Department of Defense in the future! Good hell McCain & Co.! Should we take you all out back and filibuster your butts over past mistakes and if so, can we start with your putting Sarah Palin on the national scene?
That is true, Jody, and I had forgotten that he couldn't get the votes needed. I think Bernie Sanders is one who has been pushing for substantive reform as well. Someday.
No kidding, Layton! They (McCain, most notably) seemed to harp on about the past more than they did about what is going on today.
Will that be before or after McConnell filibusters himself (which I might add, is not a nice thing to do in public)?
McConnell does that and Ashley Judd can start picking out the drapes.
So far, every Democrat, plus two Republicans (Thad Cochran of Mississippi and Mike Johanns of Nebraska) seem likely to vote for Hagel, giving him 57 votes.
====================
I guess I'd like to see McCain get in the face of Johanns and Cochran and ask them a question: 'Are you wrong for supporting Chuck Hagel for SecDec and I'm right for not supporting him? A simlpe yes or no will do and then you can add whatever you want to'
@Layton,
Should we take you all out back and filibuster your butts...
The mind reels. I'm reminded of the interview Sarah Palin did while the turkeys were being slaughtered in the background.
Oh, the humanity!
Isn't it strange how you sometimes find yourself rooting for McCain to be successful?
I can't figure out whether there's a sane, rational person left in the GOP.
The republican/tea party sure looks so sad. But also its funny as hell. You guys sure know how to pick em. McConnell must sure make you all proud of your party. Old mitch must still think he's going to make the President a one termer. You republican/tea partiers are making America the laughing stock of the world.
To my fellow Kentucky Democrats Please pick a candidate who is truly qualified to defeat mcconnell.
I call BS. McConnell is simply blowing smoke.
Hummmmmmm ... Give the President his choice ... for Secretary of Defense .... Chuck Hagel is a fair & decent man .......a wise choice at this time ...
I have to shake my head and laugh, when I see Jon McCain, (Who chose Sarah Palin as a presidential running mate,) blustering & blabbering, over the Presidents choice ... what pathetic puppet he is ... It's time for him to leave .... he's destructive to the party he is alleged to represent ....
Mr Hagel will be confirmed ....
One thing about the republicans, they are historical, soon to be placed on the historical junk heap of history along with their Whig predecessors. Historical obstructionism usually leads to historical obsolescence.
Anything to take time away from working on the country's real business.
Smitty-4183671 .. I'm with you... I'm a Kentucky Democrat that votes against McConnell every chance I get...
Every senator should do everything in his/her power within the law to prevent a nominee they believe would be disastrous to the security of the United States. If they don't do everything in their power to prevent this guy from becoming secretary of defense, they are just as much to blame as those who voted for him.
Most presidents nominate people for cabinet posts who are acceptable to most people on both sides of the aisle. Usually these votes are just a formality because the person nominated is an obvious choice and is widely supported by most senators of both parties. But in this case, even some Democrats acknowledge that Chuck Hagel was a controversial candidate to begin with, and that he was very weak in the hearing.
And many senators have stated that they view Chuck Hagel as unfit to be secretary of defense. So this is not a time for polite politics. If they believe that Chuck Hagel will hurt America's security and may send the worst possible message to America's friends and its enemies alike at a critical time, then they must stop him from becoming secretary of defense, even at the cost of a filibuster, and all the political fallout that it may entail.
If a member of the United States Senate believes that a nominee will hurt America's security and standing in the world, then it is his or her duty to prevent that by any legal means! And if that means resorting to filibuster, then so be it! If the security of the United States is at stake, then just voting 'no' with the knowledge that it will make no difference is not enough! And McCain should also think about this before he allows a nomination that he also sees as disastrous to go ahead, just for the sake of playing nice...
It's time to put up or shut up!
But but but... McConnell gave him a hand shake, I mean that's as good as gold, right?
He should have called for a vote to let the American public know who was against filibuster reform.
Obama should withdraw Hagel's name and submit Richard Danzig, Jack Reed, Lawrence Korb or John Hamre as Secretary of Defense. Hagel is too conservative and too entrenched in the Military Industrial Complex and we need a Secretary with more progressive credentials.
Just stating the intent to filibuster should no longer be enough. If they want to block the legislative process, make them stand up and talk like the old days. It was never supposed to be an easy thing to do.
I am a KY Democrat who votes against McConnell every chance I get, but that said KY is the state that has given us ROn Paul, lets not count Ashley Judd (or any other dem) in until all the votes are counted. If I am not mistaken the entire House delegation is republican ( there might be 1 democrat but not sure) and our entire Senate Delegation is republican, KY is a confused state.
I agree with you, Charlie.
What kind of messages does the Far Right send out to the nation, by threatening this obstructive act for the umpteenth time? How low can they go? The GOP would filibuster their OWN, for his being a political moderate with superior credentials for the job.
Is this the example they want every American to follow?
Who in the hell does McConnell thing he is impressing? The 2014 Election is already shaping up to be a Republican disaster...and all because of the House Republicans. Is Mitch trying to outdo them? If so Mitch here's a hint...don't waste your time.
If loosing the women's vote and Latino vote didn't hurt the Republican Party last election; when the Republican House kills Immigration Reform and refuses to deal with the "real" upcoming fiscal cliff they might as well just lay down.
Add to that the infighting between the Neoconservatives and the Tea Party and you have a formula for about 25% of the Republican party pealing off and trying to join (or taking over) the Libertarians Party...I look forward to watching that one.
"I call BS. McConnell is simply blowing smoke."
He's from KY. Filtered or unfiltered? Regular, king, or 100s?
How could John Tower never have broken a pledge in his life but was married twice?
...maybe they were mail order...
... his fingers were crossed at the time.
"How could John Tower never have broken a pledge in his life but was married twice?"
Thats easy ..... He was drunk both times ...... lol
Let's see, we managed about two weeks without the GOPers threatening to filibuster. Knew it couldn't last. Not too smart, Senator McConnell.
Who will rid us of this flaming @!$%# McConnell?
Charemor..........Ashley Judd's star is rising every day! The ominous Tea Party Right is right on course at challenging the "Chinless Wonder" in the primary. I cannot wait to see which vaginal probe idiot they will choose and put on the national stage to represent them! Stay tuned!!
Minnesotan - does Ron Paul have a brother?
Of course they'll filibuster, anything to obstruct. If they couldn't make Obama a one term president than their only hope is to filibuster the heck out of every appointment they can.
Oh geez, the day has been on the dull side anyway, so, let's make history.
So Mr. Reid, do you feel like an idiot yet for caving on filibuster reform? You should!
If we are not going to bring up the past, then are we done blaming Bush for Obama's past five years? Besides I thought peoples past comments is how we establish that someone is not suited for the post. At least is was when we argued against Mitt. Right? Who cares if Hagel has changed his statements, that would make him a flip flop right? We gotta stop guys like that from having influence. Lets make history.
Snne - the difference - Hagel's comments were from YEARS ago. Mitt changed his mind daily - sometimes more often. Do you understand NOW????
Investigate, yes. The questions asked had little to do with philosophy of the person for the office. It had little to do with anything but one incident, Bengazi and some way to screw over the Administration for it. Obviously they saw Mr. Hagel as a traitor to the Republican party by accepting an appointment in a Democratic Administration. I just don't see what Hagel has done that would disqualify him for Defense Secretary. Please list the objections Senator McCain, Senator Graham and others may have. Angry because they got taken to the woodshed in November those children will continue to lash out with their little snits and temper tantrums whether through fillibuster or some other method. Harry Reid is no better than they are by not putting the nix on this foolishness when he had the chance.
People do change their minds with knowledge they didn't have before. Flip flopping to suit the current audience doesn't qualify for a single intellegent mind change.
Hell no! Bush came within millimeters of sending this country spiraling down into another Great Depression, and Obama's past four years (don't know where you get "five") would have been far more successful if the GOP had made an earnest effort to pass legislation that would benefit the country economically--instead of spending all their time naming post offices and trying to make the president look bad. (The latter didn't work out, though, did it?)
And you call yourself "sane"? I've got a better name for you, but I think I'll be a good boy and not post it.
Jack - you have more self-control than I do today and I commend you for it!
Seeking - Maybe, but I always read your posts because you make me laugh.
The great thing about women on the Left who post here is that they're intelligent, upbeat and have a good sense of humor. Whereas women on the Right are . . . dour and not too bright.
Jack - thank you sir. I totally lost my temper with the gun lovers today. It's frightening they believe the nonsense they post about the government taking over their guns. That is why I get soooo angry. Are people REALLY that dumb? Well, yes, yes they are! Oh my!
Jack in Portsmouth
You sound like a misanthrope where women on the right are concerned. I guess they aren't entitled to have their own opinions especially when they don't agree with your own. Very sad for you.
A little help, please. Why do those "honorable" Congresspeople just get to say they'll filibuster, instead of actually having to take the floor and speak for hours on end? When Mr. Smith went to Washington, he had to do it, right? Let's see now ... free medical, "insider trading" perks, pension benefits ( not entitlements?) and then one guy says the f-word, to get his way without actually having any skin in the game. If you send your boss a note telling her/him that you're on the job, getting it done, but you're really not, how would that work out for you? Those "leaders" had enough time to chat about steroid use, but not enough time for this ploy?
Hagel has no idea how things are in the real world. It looks like he favors arabs over our jewish allies.
Wow, Henry, you just made McCain's point without even realizing it. The big stink was over calling the lobbyists for Israel the "jewish lobby".
And the point he was making is that the Israeli lobby has too much influence in our Congress, which it does. Just because they are our allies (and NOBODY is disputing that they are, or that they're security is our number one priority in the middle east), doesn't mean no one should ever say anything negative about them, or that they should have undue influence over our lawmakers.
When asked by the committee who he meant when he said members of congress are intimidated by the Israeli lobby, Hagel should have pointed to McCain and his lesbian girlfriend Lindsay. They're the ones running around wanting to bomb Iran (which would be disastrous for us and would most probably draw Israel into an all-out war with multiple enemies).
I don't get a warm feeling from Hagel, he wouldn't be my first choice, but the questioning by the committee was pitiful and partisan.
I don't think the Republicans will filibuster the nomination of Hagel. Did all of you liberals feel the same way when the Republicans threatened to change the rules and the Democrats were in the minority? Remember the so called "nuclear option" and the screaming and whining from the Democrats. What goes around comes around and Harry Reid was smart enough to know the Democrats will not always have control of the Senate.
The filibuster is simply a way to frustrate majority rule. At least in "Mr. Smith Goes to Washington" Jimmy Stewart had to stand up there and keep speaking.
The way they do it now is ridiculous and lazy. Maybe Reid shouldn't have pushed to eliminate it altogether (I think he should have, but probably wouldn't have been able to), but he should at least have fought hard to return to the speaking filibuster, ala "Mr. Smith...".
Sure, the dems used it in the past when they were in the minority, but not on a scale even remotely close to the abuse by McConnell et al these last 4 years. No comparison whatsoever.
Mike - Didn't know there was a scale that says both parties can use only so many filibusters. As I said above Harry Reid knew that the Democrats are going to be in the minority one day and the rules he makes today will work against him in the future. BTW, you didn't answer my question, about were you FOR IT when the Republicans threatened to change the rules, bet you wasn't.
True, we democrats did complain, but we never used it in the fashion, or with anything near the frequency that the GOP has, the democrats at least sat at the table and negotiated in good faith, something the GOP hasn't done. We all just have to look back in time to when Obama and Bonehead had a preliminary agreement on the table to cut 4 trillion over ten years from the deficit and then have it fall apart because of the teapublicans desire to blow up the government.
I think most democrats were comfortable changing the rules back to a talking veto. Minority or not, you should have to get up and defend your position, or you're not serious about it at all. And also, you have to remember that you're a minority party for a reason. If you're a believer in democracy, and majority rule, then you should find the filibuster offensive. If you find yourself in a minority party position, then you need to see why you're so out of step with the majority of Americans, and perhaps start changing.
sfcret
Republicans used the filibuster more times in the last 4 years than in all of history.
If you can't see how there's no comparison to the Democrats during the Bush years you're blind.
Dangerous Mind - So the Republicans used the filibuster more than the Democrats, what else have you got to cry and whine about? I can just see you now saying "Mommy, those bad Republicans won't let us liberals play our games or get what we want."
Did you ever stop to think if the President had shown any LEADERSHIP and tried talking to the Republicans instead of talking down to them, and if he had tried to work with them instead of belittling them he might have gotten something accomplished besides dividing the country. President Obama has been the most divisive President in history. He believes he is entitled to what ever he wants.
BTW, where is the President's Budget Request, you know the one that is suppose to be submitted between the 1st Monday in January and the 1st Monday in February? Oh, I forgot he had to jet off to Minnesota to talk about gun control. To bad he didn't stop off in CHICAGO and give a talk on the number of killings there, but then most of those killings were Gang Bangers from the Ghettos.
Steve C - If you do some research you would find that it was Obama who walked away from the deal with the Speaker, but just keep drinking the cool-aid.
Obama worked very hard to compromise with the GOP during his first two years. After the 2010 midterm disaster, he tried even harder. We democrats were very frustrated and felt that he was giving away the store. And what did it get him? A few hundred "symbolic" votes to overturn Obamacare and not much else.
McConnell was unembarassed to state that his primary goal was to make Obama a one-term president. How did he and his cohorts plan to do this? By stagnating the economy and having the right-wing media attack the president on jobs and the deficit (which is a phony crisis anyway) and by throwing around words like "socialist" and "redistribution of wealth". The filibuster was used by the GOP to prevent anything from getting done.
Boner talks about how the senate hasn't put out a budget in 4 years. That's because his buddies in the senate wouldn't let any serious budget talks take place.
If you want an answer to your question: no, it wouldn't have bothered me to lose the filibuster when the dems were in the minority. It's an antiquated parliamentary tool that shouldn't have survived the 18th century.
@sfcret
I don't drink koolaid, the president did not walk away, the speaker knew that he didn't have the votes, hell he can't get the votes when its his own proposals.
The President doesn't do budgets, it is the responsibility of congress to do budgets, why should the president even attempt a budget when the first thing out of republican mouths is No? The problem is, and has been, the republicans elected to the house in 2010, and the McConnell-Cantnor obstructionism.
Steve C - I see you didn't do any research but just spout the liberals talking points. Obama figured he would get a better deal from the 6 (?) Senators that was trying to work on a deal. When that fell through he went back to the Speaker but also moved the goal posts.
The President DOES submit a BUDGET REQUEST, prior to the House and Senate doing a Budget. I suggest you do some research of the Federal Budget then get back to me and we can have a discussion. FYI, the House has written a Budget Resolution every year, but the Senate has not written one for over 3 years. The President has submitted his Budget Request every year but not on time.
Is that the reason the republican accepted a smaller deal, well excuse me for not doing the research(lol).
Once again, its not the responsibility of the president to come up with the budget, that is a congressional responsibility, so all your points are moot.
Well, Emperor Caligula appointed his favorite horse to the Senate. No surprise that Emperor Obama would nominate for Secretary of Defense a genuine horse's ......
Steve,
You wonder why nobody bothers to reply to your posts? They are inane! If you have a useful, thought out proposal or comment, that's great. Otherwise people just ignore you.
Well, if I appointed my horse to the U.S. Senate today, I guarantee he'd be smarter than 90% of the Repugnantcan Senators currently serving!
We know Romney wouldn't have appointed his horse. He needs him in the olympics.
If anyone is curious about why polls show that the vast majority of Americans do not trust government, this is one example among many, many.
How can Americans trust a government that shows itself to be subservient to the desires of Israel. After all, the only reason Hagel is being opposed is because he dared speak out against some of the actions of Israel and the Jewish lobby representing Israel, called AIPAC.
Israel should have no say in who our Secretary of Defense will be. Jews are but 2% of the population of this country and should have a 2% say in how the country is being run. It is time to endless stream of benefits to Israel, including the annual aid packages, the tax benefits for wealthy donors to Israel and the free military hardware.
Israel's economy is
thriving in a global economic meltdown. The Jewish state's 2009-12 economic
growth of 14.7 percent leads all the advanced countries of the world, followed
by Australia with 10.7; Canada 4.8; United States 3.2; Germany 2.7; France 0.3;
European Union minus 1.5 percent.
These figures show Israel is well able to support themselves. If they want more military strength, let them purchase it with their own money. Their citizens can make sacrifices in health care and housing, just like we do in the USA.
I guess Stevie boy here wants the US to be strong enough militarily so we can fight more wars for Israel, starting with Iran, right Stevie? Your perfect Defense Sec. would be Paul Wolfowitz, right Stevie?
Ralph We give more aid to the arab countries then we do Israel.
Israel would never allow us to get involved in their military operations. Why would they depend of a country that has no idea on how to win a war? Israel fights to win. We lost the ability to fight after WW2. We got to soft.
Kevin - Your post is a lie. We don't give Arab countries anything close to what we have given Israel. As I pointed out, Israel is doing quite well and it would show something if they got off the dole, but being greedy people, it is unlikely. They take everything they can get and then try for more.
We pay Pakistan to work with us against al-Qaeda and the Taliban. We also dump a lot into Afghanistan, because we invaded the country in order to make the place safe for the TAPI gas pipeline, which is designed to transport Israeli owned gas from Turkmenistan- Afghanistan -Pakistan-to India. The pipeline will make Israel trillions.
Oil companies proposed the pipeline in 1995, but
it dropped off their agenda after the Taliban took control of Afghanistan the
following year. The plan was revived after the United States-led invasion of
Afghanistan in 2001, and received backing from the Asian Development Bank,
which financed feasibility studies.
Iran
can sell gas to India at a third the price of Turkmenistan. This is the ENTIRE
issue. In Turkmenistan Israel holds the lease rights to sell this gas and US
companies are building the pipeline called TAPI. This has gotten Iran upset and
that is what the whole reason for petroleum sanctions. We have US military
holding the Taliban at bay in the North all the while prince and his private
paramilitary mercenary forces are executing pipeline security privately in the
South to lend some sort of propriety to this whole sham of a war
Oil companies proposed the pipeline in 1995, but it dropped off their agenda after the Taliban took control of Afghanistan the following year. The plan was revived after the United States-led invasion of Afghanistan in 2001, and received backing from the Asian Development Bank, which financed feasibility studies.
Iran can sell gas to India at a third the price of Turkmenistan. This is the ENTIRE issue. In Turkmenistan Israel holds the lease rights to sell this gas and US companies are building the pipeline called TAPI. This has gotten Iran upset and that is what the whole reason for petroleum sanctions. We have US military holding the Taliban at bay in the North all the while prince and his private paramilitary mercenary forces are executing pipeline security privately in the South to lend some sort of propriety to this whole sham of a war
So you can now see that we have spent a fortune in Afghanistan and thousands of dead and wounded soldiers so Israel can make a fortune.
Hagel is the perfect Obama appointee for Defense....anti-Israel and apparently too stupid to come up with an original thought. He'll do nicely screwing up US Defense policy on behalf of the most radical Leftist in the White House since Woodrow "let's make the world safe for democracy" Wilson.
Heck, let Odipshyt have his choices and continue to screw everything up. At the end of this second term the people will be fed up and clean the lefties out of Congress.
Yea, right Rex. I really believe it's the other way around. As a former republican and now a proud independent, I'm happy to say that we should vote about 3/4's of them all out!. Especially the ultra conservative idiots. While I would be happy to consider what would have been a moderate republican like Jon Huntsman, your party would rather purge this individuals. You and your ilk will be relegated to a period of "bad" history. Good riddance!
FrisbyDog,
Couldn't have stated my position any better than what you have.
Right now, right here in United States, disproportionate Israeli/Jewish media, financial and political control is rampant. Our country, not just Palestine, has been occupied by Israel. The Wall Street felons remaining unpunished and AIPAC actually writing congressional legislation attest to the depth of the occupation.
Once great America has been bankrupted by: 1. Our Mideast wars instigated by Israel. 2. Our support for the Jewish state's Mideast conquests. 3. The Great Recession felonies of Wall Street's ethnic Israel Firsters and their traitorous ethnic Israel Firster government enablers.
Right now, United States needs Senator Chuck Hagel, an America Firster Secretary of Defense.
It is great to see the anti-Semites come out of the woodwork. More people need to see the types of people who support Hagel.
Hey sass! You mean if I disagree with any of my Jewish friends and colleagues on any issue then I'm Anti-Semitic? Where is the logic in that? Can't I support Israel and also say that building settlements in the West Bank is a bad idea? While I don't agree with what John's saying, where is your supposed logic????????
Just look at all the anti-Semitic vitriol he is spouting. It is Goebbels all over again. He is blaming the recession on the Jews as well. What John is spouting is clear anti-Semitism and rabid paranoia. There is no doubt about this fact.
Hey sass, it was the Jewish bankers who caused our economic plight. Hell, one guy alone, Madoff, was responsible for 50 billion dollars in losses. It was the Jewish neocons who planned and sold the wars, which will end up costing as much as 6 trillion dollars. Israel is the beneficiary of billions of dollars in aid each and every year for decades, while America is going bankrupt. We just paid a billion dollars for their f--ing "Iron Dome" system.
We are sick and tired of supporting the Israeli parasites. It is time for Israel to get off the American dole. Don't you people have an ounce of pride? My guess is no.
I am not here to bash Jews, but it is a wonder how so many of them were in control of the banks, how many signed on to the irresponsibility of the housing market, and how many had their asses bailed out.
Its time to end "To Big To Fail", Teddy Roosevelt busted these guys down, time to do it again, they are monopolistic in their size.
What was that statement Obama made?, "sense of urgency". I guess when it comes to JOBS & the ECONOMY, those are urgent matters that can wait another four years as you've done already, Hey< Obama. Whats the difference if the American public works, I can just take away ALL their Guns and Ammo. This way the American public can Not go after Obama and friends when the American public loooses their Homes. And Jobs, well, if the Public has Jobs, they can go out and buy Guns to protect themselves from the US Federal Government and Barack Obama. after all, the real Terrorists in this Country, Starts in Washington DC. The first four years Obama proved that he (Obama) could destroy the Economy and get the American public to Beg to Obama for help. The help the Public will receive will only be the fact that Obama will state that he 'Alone' will correct this problem. Of course, Obama won't tell you how much more moneys are needed for Obama and friends to make that happen. We've just begun to witness Obamas tyranny against the United States of America. Think it's a joke. then let's see how that joke turns out when he's done!
If that should happen, it would prove once again that minority rules in the senate, which is a travesty of the democratic principles. And it would also prove that the democrats are once again burned by the republicans because they could have ended this idiotic filibuster on demand rule but decided to chicken out at the last minute. Harry Reid should be replaced as the majority leader in the Senate.
I guess when you do not control the white house or the senate and only control the house because of gerrymandering the only way you can impose your will is through procedure. It is a shame it has come to this. However, conservatives have moved further to the right and consequently their elected representatives reflect that move. I believe it will eventually make them irrelevant but I have been wrong before. We have several problems, republicans do not not want to pay anymore taxes but want to protect the programs they believe are important, democrats do not mind paying more taxes and want to protect the programs they believe are important. Neither is a practical approach. Real wages have not gone up in 30 years and that is breaking us. Neither side has the slightest idea what to do about it so their fights become more and more petty. Since most of the current generations only contribution to society is to work and pay taxes they think they are carrying a big load.
They will look pretty stupid blocking Hagel. Somehow being stupid just doesn't bother republicons.
OMG- Fox dropped Palin! Santorum will have to fill in
Blame Harry Reid for this. Don't buy into the idea that Reid didn't have the votes to kill the filibuster. The votes were there, but Reid looked to his own self interest rather the American people in allowing the filibuster to stay. As for republicans, did anyone actually think the party of 'No' was not going to continue to use the filibuster at every opportunity?
The votes were not there. No less than eight Democratic Senators expressed their opposition to the Reid proposal that would have essentially gutted the filibuster rule. Facing defeat, Reid offered McConnell the lesser deal and gave him a deadline for accepting or rejecting it. McConnell took it and the "watered-down" version accomplishes mostly ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ nothing.
At this point, it would not be surprising that this would be another attractive feather in the cap of the ominous Republican parties "Death Spiral" Go for it boys! Hey Ashley, another feather in your cap in your run against the "Chinless Wonder" Mr Mc Connell! You GO girl!!
I want to see McConnell get up and really filibuster. Stand there and talk for hours on end like in Mr. Smith Goes to Washington. If the old fart can't do it, then get out of the way. Time for term limits on these fossils. They have forgotten what Democracy is and are holding this country hostage to their own zeal for power.
You always hear the republicans scream about your RIGHTS. But I guess that the only RIGHTS they are worried about are your RIGHTS to carry an assult rifle loaded with a 100 round drum and go into crowd or school again and start killing me people.
Mc Cain was worried about the fact that CHUCK was against the surge. WHAT about CHUCK'S RIGHTS to FREEDOM OF SPEECH? I guess he has no RIGHTS to that.
AND Mc CONNELL wants to FILIBUSTER? OK. MAKE him stand and filibuster the whole dam time.
THE OLD MAN will not be able to survive a FILIBUSTER like that.
The Republicans did a great job of asking about comments that happened 6 to 10 years ago but when you ask them about their "pasts", how dare we bring up that stuff now! As we all know, the GOP wouldn't know the truth if it rose up and bit them on the nose ala Richard Nixon. I wonder if Mr. Hagel is going to change his party affiliation after this fiasco with McCain and Graham? As for Harry Reid, don't mention his name and the word Democrat in the same breath.
funny how both GOP and Dems are collaborating to get that @##hole McConnell
ousted. This guy seriously needs to go regardless of his position on Hagel.
Second term and they are STILL trying to block everything Obama tries to do. Can't wait until 2014.