Streams

A Filibuster by Any Other Name

Friday, February 15, 2013

Yesterday the Senate voted "no" -- by one vote -- on a move that would have allowed the confirmation of Chuck Hagel as Defense Secretary. Steven Dennis, White House corespondent for CQ/Roll Call, discusses why Republicans are delaying the vote, and what next week may hold.

Guests:

Steven Dennis

Comments [24]

Edward from Washington Heights AKA pretentious Hudson Heights

RUCB_Alum,

I know and feel that the world is better off with osama bin laden sleeping with the fishes.

It's worth noting that osama bin laden had safe haven in Pakistan - despite Pakistan being a good friend of the US and recipient of US aid.

And if you believe that saddam hussein never had WMD's, tell that to the Kurds of Halabja Iraq.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halabja_poison_gas_attack

Feb. 18 2013 01:57 PM

@Edward from Washington Heights AKA pretentious Hudson Heights

"I hagel were Secretary of Defense, osama bin laden would still be alive."

Presuming you meant to type "If"...

Bob Gates WAS the Republican SecDef when the Bin Laden raid conducted and he WAS against it. Obama went in any way.

If Obama and the Democrates had taken office with the same attitude that the GOP is now taking toward Benghazi, Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz and Feith - and possibly Rice would have been tried for misleading the country into the Iraq War.

Why don't you try typing what you know instead of how you feel.

Feb. 17 2013 02:24 PM
Edward from Washington Heights AKA pretentious Hudson Heights

I hagel were Secretary of Defense, osama bin laden would still be alive.

Feb. 16 2013 12:43 AM
Non-Zionist, Independent Orthodox Jew (Noach) from Brooklyn

I am ashamed at the inquisition of Hagel, a combat veteran, by discredited, war-mongering chickenhawks.

An obscene spectacle.

Feb. 15 2013 04:34 PM
Fred from Brooklyn

Martin from Manhattan: Did you read the rules about being civil? "Barry the Clown"? Perhaps you confused this for Sean Hannity's webpage?

Here are the facts as I see them: Barack Obama won the election. He gets to choose his cabinet. The senate gets to oversee this to make sure no one gets a cabinet position who shouldn't. That used to mean no one has bribed their way into the cabinet, no one who is "unfit" (guilty of a crime, corruption, or any other questionable practice that betrays the public trust in a quasi-legal way, not just because you disagree with their leagl opinion). I've heard nothing that puts this choice in any of these categories.

Obama won people. He gets to choose.

Feb. 15 2013 11:51 AM
amalgam from NYC by day, NJ by night

@ Chuzzle -

Yes, you're right, the Obama admin. operates like the governments of the Soviet Union or present day China. Good analogy.

And certainly Romney's use of tax code gray areas for his 100s of billions wasn't, by any standards, extreme or done at a completely different scale, right?

Lew and Romney's situations are identical and Obama is the head of smug Marxist US government apparatus.

Totally rational points. Sure thing, Chuzzle.

Feb. 15 2013 11:41 AM
Martin Chuzzlewit from Manhattan

.....and while we are on the subject of BARRY THE CLOWN and his questionable nominations who should be filibustered....

What about "Cayman Island Jack"? Jack Lew?

So after one tax cheat at Treasury (Little Timmie Geithner), President 51% is nominating another tax evader for the slot.
(And Barry spent a billion dollars in the election smearing Romney for Cayman accounts.)

This is like the old Soviet Union, or present day China, where the inner party apparatchiks get rich while preaching philosophical righteousness to their masses of lefty deluded followers. All smug, but poor.

Feb. 15 2013 10:41 AM

None of these issues have anything to do with the actual job Hagel will undertake at the Pentagon. He was never asked about dealing with troops, budget, new technologies, etc. This is political grandstanding.

Feb. 15 2013 10:29 AM
john from office

Tea party will wear suicide belts and will destroy the republican party.

Feb. 15 2013 10:28 AM
Michael from NJ

There were over eight successful attacks on US consulates during the Bush administration. Where was Gramm and McCain?

Where was the outrage then? No one seems to want to ask them where they were.

Feb. 15 2013 10:26 AM
Rich P from Long Island

Hagel was a grunt (E5) when he served in Vietnam, so he would take a decision to advise sending men and women to war very seriously. Benghazi is a red herring. A huge chunk of the Republicans want bodies to send to war without much pushback.

Feb. 15 2013 10:24 AM
John from NYC

This is absurd -- to say that this treatment of a nominee is unprecedented.

What about the Dems and John Bolton?

I am tired of hearing that any Republican objection to Obama's policies is unprecedented.

Feb. 15 2013 10:23 AM
Jim

Hagel aside, the Filibuster as a tool is a very good thing for representative governance. Some things are too important to be left to an ephemeral 51% majority.

Feb. 15 2013 10:22 AM
Mick from Inwood

I think Hagel was put forward as a straw man whose views are acceptable to Obama if confirmed, but if not confirmed, would make the Republicans look bad for dumping on one of their own who was nominated as a move toward bi-partisanship. In addition, then the Republicans would not be able to turn down Obama's next nominee to Defense even it it were the incarnation of George McGovern.

Feb. 15 2013 10:22 AM
Zeggae from Ny

When I was in high school in my country a teacher told me that the US will always be fighting wars all over the world because its important to the economy etc. Chuck Hagel represents a threat to the war machine. He won't be confirmed.

Feb. 15 2013 10:20 AM
Katie Kennedy from Huntington, NY

All one has to do is listen to what John McCann said yesterday. This whole exercise is simply personal--"The Maverick" who was not afraid to oppose his party (so he said when he was running for president), is insulted when another member of his party thinks for himself. The Republicans are not thinking of what is best for this country. They're just "mean boys."

Feb. 15 2013 10:20 AM

Filibuster reform now!!!

Feb. 15 2013 10:18 AM
Thomas Pinch

When did Bush ever nominate a Dem for such a position? Obama should let this Republican pull his nom', and then next nominate a true liberal for this position.

Marting, Obama's term has just started. You are such a sad, sad, little man.

Feb. 15 2013 10:17 AM

the Dems SHOULD have asked for more info on 911. Why does a confirmation of a major post have to take 2 hours...let it take a month.

Feb. 15 2013 10:15 AM
Martin Chuzzlewit from Manhattan

FILIBUSTER !!!

Only 1434 days left until this CLOWN leaves the White House..... make him a LAME DUCK for the whole time.

Limit the damage he will do to the country.

Feb. 15 2013 10:14 AM

Brian, you think Obama has been reluctant to send troops and engage in war?

Feb. 15 2013 10:13 AM
Antony

Brian,

Did Hagel actually say "bad" things about Jews, or did he question Israeli settlements and policies, and is that being labeled as "bad"? Can you clarify? I know that generally questioning anything that Israel does or anything a Jew says is immediately categorized as anti-Semitic, but seriously, is there a real issue here?

Antony

Feb. 15 2013 10:13 AM
TP

Look, Dem's have no love for Hagel. If the Republicans don't like that Obama has nominated a Republican then he should let them know that the back-up to Hagel is Barnie Frank. After that I'd nominate Denis Kuchenich. Seriously, if they don't like a conservative for this post, then nominate a true Democrat.

Feb. 15 2013 10:12 AM
Peg

Why are Republicans asking for Benghazi info from Hagel? Shouldn't they be asking their darling Kerry for that information?

Feb. 15 2013 10:03 AM

Leave a Comment

Email addresses are required but never displayed.

Get the WNYC Morning Brief in your inbox.
We'll send you our top 5 stories every day, plus breaking news and weather.