Jennifer Rubin is having multiple immaculate orgasms!

Laugh all you want, Marty, but... The *next* filibuster of a Cabinet nominee will no longer be "unprecedented". By the time the third and forth roll on, nobody will even blink.

Yep. Anybody thinking this is something that is helping the (impotent) Democrats is fooling themselves. All it's doing is exposing Democrats as willing to sit back and allow Republicans to continue polluting the process of governance without so much as a whimper of protest.

Democrats, by their cowardice, are complicit with the continual degradation of the country by Republicans. This is on Democrats, too. They could stop it.

Not only are they filibustering a red state Republican, they are filibustering a decorated war hero. The GOP was embracing Hagel until Obama nominated him for Sec Def. Along with McConnell filibustering his own bill and the rise and fall of the Tea Party, the implosion of the GOP is now complete.

Everybody's aware of how obnoxious the Republicans are. And also how impotent the Democrats are in the face of it when they could stop it.

"Nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the average American." -- H.L. Mencken

Actually, I don't think the public can take time out from its irresponsible inattentiveness to even barely notice. The GOP knows this, and Democrats continue to allow it when they could stop it.

Harry Reid never had the ability to unilaterally do something about this himself, and it's quite likely that he simply didn't have the votes within his own caucus to pass meaningful filibuster reform.

fargazmo, it is called leadership. Something Reid lacks in abundance.

That's a comment that basically says nothing. Individual senators are granted quite a lot of power by the status quo, and old line Democratic senators like Dianne Feinstein don't want to abandon that power. Neither Harry Reid nor some other senator with this amorphous "leadership" that you're talking about could likely have dissuaded her of that opinion.

Reid could have brought it up for a vote and let the people see who is for or against obstructionism.

Yep. Let's hear it again for ol' starch-spined Harry and any of the other similarly constructed Senate Democrats involved in that filibuster "reform."

Way to rally the Democratic base for 2014, boys and gals!! Because there's no way to get your supporters motivated than to show you'll absolutely not put up any fight against those that continue to bring the country down.

Hear, hear, Harry and Friends!!

Reid could have lead on this among the caucus simply by going out and talking about it publicly and thereby put the pressure on those resistant to the reforms to get on board. Feinstine in particular would come under scrutiny in CA for not going along with it, and would find the situation very uncomfortable.

The Democratic party is certainly no stranger to internecine political in fighting and power plays but to not do something that needs doing because you can't herd the senatorial cats is a demonstration of a lack of leadership and just another reason why Reid shouldn't be leader in the first place.

I am so furious about this filibuster that my hair is on fire. Where in the hell does a freshman Senator of ONE MONTH, right from the Texas T-party, get off accusing Chuck Hegel of some kind of treasonous acts?! This man has served this country from the Vietnam war on though today, both as a soldier and a senator, he has two purple hearts and is the finest American anyone could ever find and these insects are filibustering this man's nomination? And where is our esteemed president? Oh, in Atlanta. Why is he there? Why isn't he fighting for this man who is being put through a GOP meat grinder for made-up nonsense from the likes of Lindsay Graham and this new Texas senator?

Thanks to Harry Reid, these insects and worms can filibuster this nomination, and BTW, why is the president allowing him to be hung out to dry as he did Susan Rice? Why is he in GA fighting for pre school programs while all this crap is going on that needs leadership? I am thoroughly disgusted with Obama and I also want to say that for the first time, I can see why lots of people became disappointed in him in the past. I am livid over this treatment of Hegel and the president's inability to stand up for his people.

BTW, Found out Tuesday that John Boehner was actually telling the truth when he said Obama betrayed him on that deal they'd struck. Unbelievable. Yet, I know it is true or I would never say it. I am no fan of Boehner.

I am way less of an Obama fan at the moment, too. Get back here and fight for your nominee!!! LBJ would be all over these creatures.

As for Harry Reid.........sorry not printable.....but he'd better not open his weak little mouth to protest if Hegel loses this nomination.

This is on your head, Reid, and the president's. Just go on and let the minority call the shots. (Rest unprintable)..gotta take a break. I am just furious with all of them.

Looks like more and more folks are coming around to my way of thinking about this. After the near-disaster that was Mitt Romney, I understood the next near-disaster would be Democrats continuing their impotence in the face of the sick Republican neo-Confederate tactics going on right in front of our faces. The danger is Democrats refusing to stand up to it. Our enemy includes this Democratic cowardice.

Even worse are the Democrats who, after impotently reforming filibuster in the face of its increasing abuse and with assurances the abuse would cease, are allowing the abuse not only to continue but continue to allow the worsening quality of the abuse.

It's what Democrats are. On display is the cowardice that has allowed Republicans to bully the country into a right-wing nightmare that is threatening to lay the country (and world) low for generations and possibly for good.

Thought experiment:

Suppose, for the sake of discussion, that the Senate Majority actually keeps this going while the news fills up for the first time in generations of an actual, business-of-the-Senate-stops-cold filibuster -- for the first time ever of a Cabinet nominee.

And the reason is, as Steve observes, because the Republican Party cannot abide having a decorated veteran Republican as SecDef. Keep it in the headlines day after day by calling cloture votes.

So tell us again, Mr. Preibus, what your Party stands for?

As if public opinion matters to Republicans.

It does if you remember what segment of the public they are playing to...their audience are grumpy old white people who want the government shut down and the wealthy who don't care...

The other thing to remember is that for better or for worse a lot of this falls at the feet of the President and makes him look if not unreasonable ineffective and weak...which again is always a bonus to the Conservative base

and last but most certainly not least is the continuation of the "dedicated resistance" narrative they have tried to craft for themselves

Yes public opinion matters to them a great deal.

Their party stands for one damn thing: Ruining our party.

No it's not about Democrats or liberals specifically if it weren't us it would be someone or something else...this is about having power when you are out of power...tyranny of the minority. Democrats were accused of the same thing under Bush...but that still doesn't change the fact that filibuster is broken and needs to be fixed

Yes, they care about angry ol' white boys. That's it. And they can sell tearing down Hagel to those cranks. No problem. At all.

Agree. If elected officials won't actively work to stop abuses of power, then they are aiding abuses of power, I don't care which party they're in.

It feels as if Obama really is shouldering the recovery of this nation alone...

#4.1

No, he's not, he's AWOL, too. I am as furious as I have ever been at all of them.

Come on, India - what do you mean by that? That has no basis in reality.

June Day, He seems to me to be in Georgia today. Looks real to me.

All kinds of dangerous crap about to hit the fan and he is worried about pre-schoolers? I guess you don't remember LBJ. I guarantee you he'd be fighting both for that filibuster reform which went sour and for Susan Rice and for Chuck Hegel. Do you think our enemies are not noticing that we are postponing our having a Defence Secretary? Do you realize how dangerous that is? How unprecedented?

India - I'm sure you're well aware the President can walk and chew gum at the same time? And that there are these things called phones and videoconferencing and email available on Air Force One? I don't mean to hyper-snark you, but it's all well and good to "guarantee" the behavior of past-and-dead presidents in this-circumstance-and that, but don't forget LBJ was so worn down with his presidency that he declined to even run for a second term, and this President has had to deal with comparable crisis after comparable crisis on his own watch, and is still here.

If you want to see the President take to the Senate floor demanding filibuster reform and that his Sec of Def nominee be confirmed NOW! as proof that he is very engaged with this nomination -- that's a very unrealistic view of the political process. I would think you would know as well as anyone that the conversations that actually move things in DC happen out of sight of the CSPAN cameras. In spite of all the constant drama, the presidency is not a reality show where we're going to be privy to the President's every single action and word. And again, why is it still our first instinct to blame Obama for the GOP's despicable behavior? Put the blame where blame is due. Obama is not 'the enemy'. GOP intransigience is.

I am well aware of who the enemy is, June Day.

Yep, fine gentlemen's agreement. Unfortunately, no gentlemen were involved.

The interesting thing about this vote is that by all accounts this damn filibuster isn't even universally approved in the Republican caucus and the Democrats have the votes to beat it.

You're assuming a break in Republican Party discipline -- something we haven't seen in more than four years.

DC Sessions, If we start assuming anything about Republicans they quickly make an ass out of u and me.

What does jesus mean when he told his disciple "let the dead bury the dead"? I guess jesus had something more important for this fellow to do than go to his father's funeral?

Good point Luz cause it is better to take care of the living and what their needs are than to worry about someone who is already dead and gone.

Man Luz when you put one out there you do put a doozy of a one there. You got time for a book and got me thinking. But also the "let the dead" is also when they really ignore what the people's needs are and that is where it gets complicated, since it involves going against a persons freewill and forcing people into some sort of submission which will in the end inflict abuse, misery, despair, and death on people. And people's actual needs are a list of things which consist of knowledge, food, water, respect, love, peace, caring, sharing, community, individuality, sex and the list goes on. Those very needs though help everybody in the end.

When I read it, I see it as jesus not wanting to share respect. jesus tells this disciple to stick around and make his entourage look big and say hosanna for jesus while jesus is preaching to the people that they are wrong. I see this phrase as especially misogynous as juses not only tell this disciple to not respect his father, but that his mother is not even worth mentioning. It's assumed that of course you won't get to go to your mother's funeral, and now I'm making it clear you shouldn't go to your father's either.

Strangely, I personally don't see preaching as helping people.

Well considering the "let the dead" and "the dead" never respected you in the first place why should you bother. Those times were very harsh and brutal, do you actually think it was a sweet bed of roses? Way too many people had to do just what was necessary in order to survive. Need some food sell your child into slavery. Have too many kids just leave the new born on the hillside. And the rich got extremely richer which happened to be the Pharisees and the ruling class in control which were the Romans. Disagree with these people, you were put on the cross or fed to the lions or in some way quickly dispatched. And with all this people lived in fear and did about anything just to get by.

Why isn't the president fighting for Hegel? Hegel had ZERO involvement in Benghazi and why hasn't Obama pointed that out to this twit, Graham?

Why did Obama allow Reid to give in to Mitch on the filibuster? Where's the leadership?

Why is he in GA fighting for 3 and 4 years olds instead of pulling an LBJ and picking these obstructionist congressmen up by their collars? He hung Susan Rice out to dry and now Hegel. This is deplorable. I am so disgusted with them all I could scream. When is Obama going to fight against these right-wing terrorists in our congress? Never?

False equivalency.

"Not only has no nominee ever been defeated by a filibuster, no nominee (since the cloture threshold was moved to 60 votes) has ever even faced a filibuster."

Too bad that ISN'T what your linked article says.

Yea, Secretly, you are correct. Supporting a filibuster for a Supreme Court nomination because you have questions is nothing like supporting a filibuster for a Cabinet nomination because you have questions. What was I thinking!

Dogjudge, check again...my quote IS from the "linked article." But at least you were specific in your criticism.

Good question; what were you thinking? Supreme Court nominees are occasionally filibustered. Hardly ever successfully, but it's a not incredibly uncommon occurrence in our system. There is plenty of precedent. High level cabinet nominees, on the other hand, have never in the history of the republic been filibustered. Not once. The Court can presumably function with 8 justices for awhile. The Pentagon cannot reasonably function without a boss.

In addition, you're referencing a threat to filibuster, which was acknowledged at the time by Kerry, Durbin and others in support as something that would never actually happen because it was just 7 Senators pushing for it. They wanted more time to discuss the actual positions and legal philosophy of the proposed justice at hand, Alito, as well, not extort more attention to some desperate faux-scandal on an entirely extraneous issue. Not only that, but there's nothing analogous about Democrats talking about filibustering an extremely conservative justice from the far wing of the opposing party, to Republicans threatening to filibuster a very conservative member of their own party.

Stop trolling.

If the Republicans filibuster this nomination, they're saying that having nobody in that office is better than having it occupied by Chuck Hagel. So let's just let the position remain vacant until they decide to be civil.

Obama should just let the country go without a Secretary of Defense. There are plenty of other agencies that have been operating for years without anybody at the top of the hierarchy. Maybe we'll find that this is a good way to de-emphasize the military and reduce spending at the Pentagon.

They are not questioning his qualifications, they are questioning him because they feel he betrayed McCain and the party by opposing McCain regarding the Iraq war. He has never voted against our policies concerning Israel. They also oppose him because he will make cuts in the Defense Budget, which can be done without compromising our Military. Funny the Republicans are all against cuts to our Defense budget because they feel it will weaken us, but have no problem demanding cuts to programs which will hurt our citizens who are sick, elderly, children and the poor.

MCA, "Stop trolling?" Stop making up your own facts!

According to the Congressional Research Service between 1967 and 2002, there was one attempt to filibuster the elevation of SC judge to Chief Justice, and one attempt to filibuster a Secretary nomination to the President's cabinet.

There was another attempt in 2006 to filibuster a Bush cabinet nomination and then another Democrat attempt to filibuster a Supreme Court nomination.

So, see, there is about the same history between Supreme Court filibuster and Cabinet nomination filibusters. I welcome your facts otherwise. I can be more specific with my facts if you doubt any...just let me know.

Lorr, I disagree with some of your opinion. To me, they want more information and they are using his nomination, in part, as leverage...as well as questioning his qualifications.

You cannot be serious.

First Hegel wants to reduce pentagon spending, and would fight these neo-cons on their damnable endless wars. They want a hawk like themselves in there.

That is unacceptable. We need Hegel, and desperately need a good Defence Secretary. Do you think our enemies don't see these self-imposed vulnerabilities?

Right, RobDon. Keep moving those goalposts. Is Interior now in the same tier as State, Defense and Treasury? Interesting.

The facts are that the Republican Senate minority has filibustered at an historic, nay, record-shattering pace, throughout the Obama presidency, and that they're now apparently going to filibuster a member of their own party, who happens to be a decorated war hero, for the position of head of the portion of the executive branch with which they've historically been most entangled. An appropriate analogy would be a situation in which Reagan, after spending years listening to Democrats scream that he wasn't putting enough Democrats in his Cabinet, nominated someone like Patrick Leahy to head HUD, and the Democrats fillibustered him under the pretense of wanting more information about Iran-Contra, to cover for some perceived insufficient fealty to a powerful lobbyist group.

Anyone can see this. You look like a fool pretending there's some equivalence between what's happening in the Senate right now and some make-a-point-in-knowing-futility squawking about Samuel Alito a few years ago.

By the way, the adjectival is "Democratic" not "Democrat." Which of course you knew, but some would prefer you do them the courtesy of using it correctly so as not to look like a condescending jerk.

All robtroll does is sh*t, I mean, shift those goal posts....

No, because he doesn't have the courage to do anything about it. Or, are you suggesting that he just received a backbone transplant?

Reid is worthless and weak and impotent and needs to go home and spend his time practicing his shooting skills in Arizona.

He's in the pocket of the despicable NRA, like so many of them.

Thank you, Kevo. He certainly does.

This is largely Republican angst toward Hegel, a Republican, going into the hated Obama administration. That is 98% of the BS that is putting our very country in jeopardy. Hegel is a fine man and a fine soldier.

My husband was in the Air Force during the Vietnam War and he agrees. We are both angry at Reid, the Republicans and the president right now. Where's the leadership?

A quibble: the story is actually that the scorpion hitches a ride from a frog after promising not to sting him. Halfway across, the scorpion stings the frog and as the frog dies (and therefore sinks beneath the water taking the scorpion with him) the frog asks; why? you've just killed us both. And the scorpion responds, I can't help myself, it's my nature.

Which is also not that different from what the GOP is doing now.

Can the nuclear option be done now or must it wait until the first day of the next Session of Congress? If the latter is true, it seems like a lose-lose process.

CNN says Panetta is going to the NATO meeting as Secretary of Defense. Guess he never turned in his resignation letter. Maybe he will decide to stay on and manage the sequester.

Exactly. I would love for the President to hold an extremely brief press conference, directed explicitly to Senate Republicans. "Here are my next three choices, in order: Michele Fluornoy, Tom Daschle, Susan Rice. Please proceed, GOP." This would be over in a moment.

Filibustering three is not really any harder than filibustering one, and picking those makes the whole process look a lot more reasonable.

No, Luz, the Republicans think they can ram this down Obama's throat. It is he they hate, not Hegel specifically. Several years ago McCain said of Hegel that he SHOULD be Secretary of Defence as he was so qualified and perfect for the position!

If they won't pass Hagel, they won't pass anyone, so,, we will just have to do without a secretary of defense..

Eric,#21.1

My husband was in the Air Force during Vietnam. People like these are chicken hawks. They disgust me beyond belief.

This Lindsay Graham can be very glad I am not in congress. My temperament would never stand for a single word from this pathetic little wimp, this chicken hawk, this....worm, this parasite. I'd be so up in arms at the creep I'd have to walk out of the hearings or punch him.

I agree. What is he doing in Georgia right now? Good Lord! What is going on?

They are about to postpone this and then Hegel won't be going to the Brussels meeting! This is BS!