Fri 5 Feb 2010
FRIDAY FREE FOR ALL
Posted by admin under politics
I know that I am late again because it is time for another edition of the AWMD Friday Free For All. This is the only time of the week when our arguewithmydad.com readers can control the topic(s) for discussion. All you have to do is get someone else to respond to your suggested topic and then the floor is yours. Don’t be shy and don’t hesitate. Get busy and be sure to let us know your views and arguments so everyone can read and react to them. Right here on arguewithmydad.com. I will make one suggestion for a possible topic, but it is only a suggestion. Today is Friday so only you can be the decider. But you need to tell us what you want to discuss. So, what the heck is on your mind today? With all that is going on, how can you not speak your mind? Let’s hear from you!
The only suggested topic that I have tonight is a story that I almost didn’t believe when I first read it. Republican Senator Richard Shelby from Alabama has given us the ideal example of the type of cooperation and bipartisan spirit of today’s Republican Party. It seems that Shelby has put a blanket hold on over 70 Obama Administration nominees in an attempt to get more pork projects for his state. http://thinkprogress.org/2010/02/05/shelby-blanket-hold/ Yes, you read that correctly. This is the same party that claims it is trying to be bipartisan, but the mean old Democrats won’t play fair. This is the same Senator Shelby who threatened to kill the filibuster rule during the Bush regime to prevent the Democrats from attempting to stop Bush’s judicial nominees in February of 2005. “I do not think that any of us want to operate in an environment where federal judicial nominees must receive 60 votes in order to be confirmed. To that end I firmly support changing the Senate rules to require that a simple majority be necessary to confirm all judicial nominees, thus ending the continuous filibuster of them.” http://thinkprogress.org/2010/02/05/shelby-record-nominations/ Is there no end to the hypocrisy of these so-called Leaders?
This hypocritical public servant is holding up the people’s business in an attempt to force the Obama Administration to give him the pork that he and the great State of Alabama deserve and want. I have to agree with Vice President Biden’s view that the rules may need to be changed. “Also Thursday, Vice President Biden said he was so frustrated by Republican foot-dragging that he was considering whether Senate rules should be changed.” http://www.nationaljournal.com/congressdaily/coa_20100205_3373.php The Democratic leadership is also considering recess appointments as their only alternative to this blatant abuse of Senate rules. I tend to agree with them. What do you think? Can the Republicans get any more abusive with the filibuster and hold rules?
I have made my suggestion, and it is just that, a suggestion. Let’s hear what You want to talk about. I will be anxiously waiting to see what You want to talk about. It is time to get busy and let everyone know what you are thinking about. Let’s hear from all of You! Don’t be shy and do not delay in telling us what you think. It won’t hurt to let us know what You think. Let’s hear from all of you neocons out there. Let’s see how you can justify this latest Republican abuse!
Hey Daddy O,
You must have just awaken from a long slumber, or better yet you only drink kool aid from the Democrats cup.
He are some facts that you missed during your extended sleep or your kool aid induced political coma.
Democrats blocked President Reagan’s conservative judical nominees. The Democrats blocked President G.H. Bush’s judical nominees. Republican’s blocked Clinton court nominees at about the same rate that Democrats blocked President Reagan’s conservative choices. Democrats blocked over 70% of President G.W. Bush’s judical nominees.
My point is, this happens on both sides of the aisle. Certainly I am you sure you show the same outrage when the Democrats use the same senate rules to block the Rebublicans. Or are you a hypocrite who only sees one side of every issue?
Give it some thougt while you wipe the sleepy from your eyes, maybe you can be a little more objective.
Here are some facts about the Obama administration, As of January 25, 2010, fifteen Obama nominees to Article III judgeships have been approved by the United States Senate, namely one Justice to the Supreme Court of the United States, four judges to the United States Courts of Appeals, and ten judges to the United States district courts. 24 further nominations are pending for a total of 20 current vacancies at the United States Courts of Appeals, 82 vacancies at the United States district courts and at least 20 additional federal judiciary vacancies that are already anticipated during the 111th Congress. Obama has not made any recess appointments.
The facts show that Obama has dragged his feet on the nomination process. By February 2002 his first year, President George W. Bush had nominated 89 judges to the lower federal courts. This week (2/5/10), Senate Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy(D)prodded President Obama, who has nominated just 42 federal judges to date, to “get up names as quickly as possible.” President Obama promised to make this “a priority.”
So you tell me Daddy O, who in the hell is holding up the train? It appears Obama won’t give a list of passenenger’s to the senate. So who are the so called 70 nominees that Shelby is blocking.
I am sure you will post these names, you do know who they are, don’t you?
Jack,
Welcome to AWMD. Here is a link giving you just a short listing of the security and foreign policy nominees that are part of Shelby’s outrageous blanket hold:http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2010/01/18/help_wanted%20?page=full
Here is some information from MediaMatters.org that relates to your claims that Bush had more judicial nominees blocked by Dems than Clinton had:
“Falsehood #3: Democratic obstructionism has led to far more judicial vacancies during Republican administrations than Democratic administrations
“Nuclear option” proponents have also used the “empty courtroom” argument to advance their agenda, claiming an unusual number of judicial vacancies during Republican administrations as a result of Democratic obstructionism. But what “nuclear option” advocates don’t mention is that the discrepancy in judicial vacancies over the last three administrations is primarily due to the recent creation of new judgeships and the president’s relatively slow rate of nominating candidates to fill open spots.
One such claim, that more judicial vacancies existed at the end of the George H.W. Bush administration than following the Clinton administration, is largely explained by the 85 new judgeships created by Congress in 1990. And the argument completely collapses when one examines appellate nominees alone: There were more circuit court vacancies when Clinton left office then when President George H.W. Bush did.
Comparisons of the number of current judicial vacancies to the number under Clinton are also misleading, if not outright false. Most of the current vacant federal judgeships are vacant because Bush has nominated candidates to fill only about one-third of the vacancies. There were never fewer district and appellate court vacancies during the Clinton administration than the 45 vacancies that presently exist, according to Congressional Research Service data obtained from the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts. In other words, there were actually more judicial vacancies when Republicans blocked Clinton’s nominees than there are right now.”
Finally, here is a link to the complete list of White House nominees, including the ones that have not been confirmed and are part of Shelby’s hold:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/nominations-and-appointments I realize that you live in a Fox News wordl, but at AWMD we actually deal in facts. I realize that might be hard for you to handle, but life is a bitch. Now, it is time for another nap!
Can’t we all just get along?
And don’t both sides play the same game?
I think so.
Is Palin on TV Saturday night?
Hey Daddy O,
Okay, I guess your right only Republicans are obstructionists when it comes to the review and approval of judical nominees.
My point was that both parties obstruct judical nominees, both parties are guilty of the same offense. Do you show outrage when qualified conservate judical nominees are blocked and delayed by Democrats.
I suspect that you are a one way street when comes to looking at the actions of both parties.
Once again I ask you to post the 70 names of the “judical Nominees” that Shelby is blocking. The link you gave is is nothing more than Nominations and Appointments for the entire Administration, not the list of the so called 70 people that no one can name, because as Senate Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy(D)prodded President Obama, who has nominated just 42 federal judges to date, to “get up names as quickly as possible.” President Obama promised to make this “a priority.”
I realize you get your editorial marching orders from the likes of Media Matters which was founded in May 2004. The New York Times reported that Media Matters has received “more than $2 million in donations from wealthy liberals” and “was developed with help from the newly formed Center for American Progress”
The Center for American Progress is a liberal public policy research and advocacy organization. Its website describes it as “… a nonpartisan research and educational institute dedicated to promoting a strong, just and free America that ensures opportunity for all.” It has its headquarters in Washington D.C.
Its President and Chief Executive Officer is John Podesta, who served as chief of staff to then U.S. President Bill Clinton.
Translation, Media Matters was formed by liberals and it’s primary goal is to demonize Republicans and prop up “Honest Tax Cheating Democrats like Charlie Rangle”, the Chairman of the Ways and Means Committee (they write tax law). Here is a link to this honest Democrat and his way of “putting skin in the game” (Joe Biden Quote about paying more Taxes). http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203946904574300013592601036.html
Furthermore, the real money behind both organizations is George Soros,he is a Hungarian-American currency speculator, stock investor, businessman, philanthropist for liberal anti-American causes, and political activist.
He is known for having donated large sums of money in an effort to defeat President George W. Bush’s bid for re-election in 2004. He helped found the Center for American Progress.
While your napping your buddies at Media Matters, The New York Times, ABC, NBC, CBS,MSNBC,CNN,et al will be churning out more opinionated, editorialized garbage for your mind to devourer. If you keep eating this garbage sold as the facts you will get a fat head.
Don,
I hope you are feeling better. However, I can’t agree that both sides play the same game if by that you mean lying and obstructing for political gain and for pork. Both sides have political creeps, but the mainstream Republican leadership is not cooperating on anything. We have mentioned on this site that they are on the record of wanting Obama to fail and that they will do everything to make him fail. Of course, if they succeed, the country also fails, but they do not care. Just like Gingrich shutting down the government in the 90’s, this group of obstructionists will suffer the same fate.
Jack,
I will make it very clear for you. I am not talking about judicial nominees. I only responded to your comments about them. I did not state in my posts that 70 of Obama’s judicial nominees are being blocked. Can you understand that?? I said, and the sources that I linked to reported, that 70 Obama administration or executive branch nominees are affected by the outrageous blanket hold being utilized by Sen. Shelby. As to your personal attacks on Media Matters and its founders, try showing evidence of what they are saying is false. Media Matters gives sources for its statements, how about trying to refute them with facts? Where the hell did George Soros come from? Your red herrings about Biden and Rangel and Soros do not change the facts of Shelby’s and the Republican’s sordid efforts to shut down the nomination process. Once again, yelling at all liberals and progressives does not refute that Shelby has a blanket hold on 70 Obama administration nominees in order to get more pork for his state. I gave you the full listings of those nominees from a Foreign Policy Magazine site and the White House website. Try reading them. You might learn something. Shouldn’t you be at a Tea Party convention?
Hey Daddy O,
Up until Scott Brown won Teddy Kennedy’s seat the Democrats had the following;
Democrats had a filibuster proof Senate Majority of 60 out 100 Senators.
The controlled the House of Representatives 256 to 178.
And of course President Obama is a Democrat.
So I ask, could you explain how Republicans have been able to block any legislation in the House and Senate, or for that matter stop the President from signing such Legislation into law?
The obstructions are in your own party, the Democrats could have passed any and all Legislation into law.
You say you are all about facts, well put these facts into your pipe and smoke em.
Jack,
Even before Scott Brown won the seat in Massachusetts, the 60 votes in the Senate included Lieberman who is a Republican in sheeps clothing and 3 to 5 Blue Dog senators who don’t always vote Democratic.
Once again, these facts do not relate to the hold put on these nominees by Shelby. Nice try, give it another shot and give us some evidence that Shelby doesn’t have a hold on them. I will be leaving for some family fun, so if I don’t respond immediately you will know that I an not just sleeping on the job.
“My Dad”, it looks like a busy day today. Actually there is a simple answer to Shelby’s position. He has learned from the Democrats as to just how the money game is played. First the Louisiana Purchase then the Cornhusker Hustle.
Shelby is simply trying to get his piece of pie with the Alabama Crimson Bribe. These days you have to keep up with Jones’s, Landrieu’s and Nelson’s.
Qman,
It is good to hear from you. It was a busy day yesterday with some interesting posts from Jack MO.
I mentioned in one of the postings in this thread that both sides have some creeps, but Shelby has reached a new high with this blanket hold. It isn’t by accident and it isn’t entirely due to pork issues. It is part of the Republicans planned efforts to stymie the Obama Administration as evidenced by the party leadership going along with it. Although,the Republicans usually vote in virtual lock-step on these issues,it is not surprising that Shelby is alone on this particular issue. He just happens to have agreed to take the heat for the “team”.