Cost of the Hagel Filibuster

[MoFinz]

The only confusion I see is in your understanding of thread topics.

Im sorry, was i looking like a gave a **** again?
My bad.

I'll use smaller words so you can keep up next time...

[RockyMtnPhinfan]

Wasting taxpayer money and lawmaker time on silly gesturing. That is about as much as this crap amounts to. There's no principle to it- it's like a crazy girlfriend that wants to argue with you for no ****ing reason other than to hear herself complain.

[MoFinz]

Wasting taxpayer money and lawmaker time on silly gesturing. That is about as much as this crap amounts to. There's no principle to it- it's like a crazy girlfriend that wants to argue with you for no ****ing reason other than to hear herself complain.

See....someone gets it
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

[Spesh]

Wasting taxpayer money and lawmaker time on silly gesturing. That is about as much as this crap amounts to. There's no principle to it- it's like a crazy girlfriend that wants to argue with you for no ****ing reason other than to hear herself complain.

While there was no lack of people involving with this, ive completely lost my patience with McCain. Hes been the one pushing for hearings, running to the press, demanding stronger military leadership, etc, etc, etc. He publically declared he would vote for Hagel if he got answers about Benghazi, publically declared he was satisfied with the answers he received...and still voted against Hagel. Why? 'Cause. And now the military that he so dearly loves with all his heart has no one to send to the NATO summit(read: we'll still be sending someone, but come on).

And i agree with you, theres absolutely no principle involved with this. The GOP sees a chance to make Obama's life more difficult and they are doing it, how this effects others is irrelevant to them.

That said, as the article indicated, i cant blame them for seeing no downside to this(politically that is). Reid showed his hand when he backed down from the filibuster reform. They know the voters will be more ready to elect a Republican in '16. And they know Democrats wont hold government hostage when a Republican is President. If they have no fear of losing their jobs, feel they can eventually get what they want, and feel they can successfully blame the left if something goes wrong, why not do it?

[MoFinz]

Didnt the Dems (Ted "Bad Date" Kennedy in fact) invent a term for denying a Presidential nomination?

Oh yeah, Borking.

Don't fool yourself, the Dems are just as obstructive as the GOP.....none of them work for us anymore. We should strip them of all pay and perks...Lord knows more money is spent winning a seat in DC than the seat actually pays

[Valandui]

Didnt the Dems (Ted "Bad Date" Kennedy in fact) invent a term for denying a Presidential nomination?

Oh yeah, Borking.

Don't fool yourself, the Dems are just as obstructive as the GOP.....none of them work for us anymore. We should strip them of all pay and perks...Lord knows more money is spent winning a seat in DC than the seat actually pays

Definitely. I have no real love for either party (despite being a registered Republican) but this isn't exactly unprecedented.

[GoFins!]

"Wasting lawmakers time" is a GOOD thing. When they're arguing about stupid crap they're not imposing more reactionary laws and oppressive regulations.

[Buddy]

Wasting taxpayer money and lawmaker time on silly gesturing. That is about as much as this crap amounts to. There's no principle to it- it's like a crazy girlfriend that wants to argue with you for no ****ing reason other than to hear herself complain.

You sir, are correct!
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2

[Buddy]

Definitely. I have no real love for either party (despite being a registered Republican) but this isn't exactly unprecedented.

I am about as conservative, at least physically and foreign policy wise, as you can get. However, it is really becoming blurry as to which party is which. They disagree and fight just to disagree and fight. Both parties suck!

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2

[Spesh]

Didnt the Dems (Ted "Bad Date" Kennedy in fact) invent a term for denying a Presidential nomination?

Oh yeah, Borking.

Don't fool yourself, the Dems are just as obstructive as the GOP.....none of them work for us anymore. We should strip them of all pay and perks...Lord knows more money is spent winning a seat in DC than the seat actually pays

If this was a quarter of a century ago, when "borking" was coined, i might agree.

Never before has a President had a Cabinet nominee blocked. Couple this with the 3-4 times as many filibusters since the GOP became the minority, and id happy to give the GOP the award for unprecedented obstruction. And the way they brag about it, theyd probably accept. If you want to hang onto what happened during Reagan's term to justify whats currently happening, by all means. But its attitudes like that that develop this kind of broken government. The current Republican party is not the same as the one from the 80's. Neither is the current Democratic party. Im treating them like different entitees. If we were going by just the names used, then Lincoln would be talked about more on here.

Anyway you cut it, this would normally set a bad precedent. But like i said before, the GOP is right to see no downside to this. Democrats wont retaliate when Obama's term is up(at least not in any real way). It has nothing to do with some nobility, but the fact that they lack testicular fortitude.