Getty Images
The White House's statement after the Senate Republican minority blocked a vote on Chuck Hagel's Defense Secretary nomination emphasized a point that some forget: we're still at war.
"We have 66,000 men and women deployed in Afghanistan, and we need our new Secretary of Defense to be a part of significant decisions about how we bring that war to a responsible end.
"Next week in Brussels, the United States will meet with our allies to talk about the transition in Afghanistan at the NATO Defense Ministerial, and our next Secretary of Defense should be there. With questions about the sequester looming over the Pentagon, our Secretary of Defense should be in place. For the sake of national security, it's time to stop playing politics with our Department of Defense, and to move beyond the distractions and delay. Allow this war hero an up or down vote, and let our troops have the Secretary of Defense they deserve."
In American history, a Senate minority had never blocked an up-or-down vote on a cabinet nominee -- until yesterday. Republicans broke new obstructionist ground by filibustering a Defense Secretary nominee during a war.
I emphasize this because I remember the Bush/Cheney era pretty well. The winds have shifted in the years since, but I'd like to point out, for those who've forgotten, what it was like at the time.
Americans were told pretty consistently for seven years that to publicly question the Commander in Chief or stand in the way of his national security agenda was offensive, if not outrageous. With wars ongoing, troops in harm's way, and terrorists targeting the United States homeland, critics of the Bush/Cheney administration were told to shut up and get in line -- because to question the president, when al Qaeda might hear you, was to put America in danger.
I mean that literally. In February 2007, almost exactly six years ago, Ed Koch wrote a column defending George W. Bush, insisting that criticism of the White House -- not obstructing his national security agenda, just saying unkind things -- could undermine our security: "Democrats and some Republicans in Congress are seeking to humble, embarrass and, if they can, destroy the President and the prestige of his position as the Commander-in-Chief who is responsible for the safety of our military forces and the nation's defenses. By doing so, they are adding to the dangers that face our nation."
Throughout the Bush/Cheney era, this was as common as the sunrise. Dissent was equated with disloyalty. Prominent conservatives would casually throw around words like "treason," "traitor," and "fifth columnists." To give the appearance to the world that Americans were divided at a time of war was, we were told, to help the enemy.
That was then. Their perspective seemed to change on Jan. 20, 2009.
I know the "if a Democrat did this..." comparison can get tiresome, and I try to avoid it. But try to imagine it's 2005, Bush/Cheney just won a second term, and the president nominates a decorated war hero to lead the Pentagon. Then imagine Senate Democrats, for the first time in American history, blocking a vote on the nomination. Then imagine the Senate Democratic ringleader bragging on national television that Democrats did so in part because the nominee hurt their feelings. Then imagine liberal activists cheering them on.
Do you realize how big a scandal this would be? Do you think it'd even be possible to hear about anything else?
Leave a Comment:
The war in Iraq is still costing American taxpayers billions of dollars a year. As shown here, hundreds of millions of dollars were recently allocated to teach English language skills to Iraqi air technicians....in Jordan:
http://viableopposition.blogspot.ca/2012/08/the-never-ending-costs-of-iraq-war.html
The war in Iraq is part of the reason that the Republicans "filibustered" the Hagel confirmation. The "contractors on the ground" made billions during the Iraq and Afghanistan war. This is part of the reason the Benghazi affair is kept alive by Fox and McCain and Graham --- we did not go into Libya with ground troops and give the "contractors" even more profits or are not going into Syria or into Iran. While Americans, Iraqis and Afghans were dying, the "contractors" were wending their way into the billionaire ranks.
A more basic reason for the "delay," for the filibuster of Hagel's confirmation is that the Kochs (and their $30 million lobbying budget) were firing a shot across the President's bow. They were saying that we haven't given up the filibuster as a way to secure continued minority rule in the Senate. You can't trust the Kochs to live up to what they say. They lie to people. Ask the people in Wisconsin whether Scott Walker campaigned on destroying bargaining rights for public employees. He didn't! But that was one of the first measures that the Kochs had him jam through in the first weeks of Walker becoming Governor.
DON'T TRUST THE KOCHS! They are having too much fun playing the "minority rules" game.
"...critics of the Bush/Cheney administration were told to shut up and get in line -- because to question the president, when al Qaeda might hear you, was to put America in danger."
I too remember those years, and I also recall Bill'O saying that the opposition needed to shut up or move to another country. But that was so 6 years ago, now WE the people have to pay for the fact that WE voted the Black man back into office instead of continuing to swallow the lies told by the GOTP!
What these people have done amounts to treason - it is their attempt to undermine both the authority of the President and to act in disloyal and subversive ways! These people need to be charged with treason - they also need to be tarred and feathered and walk around with signs saying "I'm a traitor to my nation and my constituents"!
Were you trying to be deliberately snarky there. I agree that disagreeing and actively trying to undermine the administrative Cabinet are two different things. But if we're going to criticize the previous era where liberals were called traitors/terrorist sympathizers we should probably avoid the same rhetoric. Lets not forget that there were many prolonged battles over funding Bush's wars. I agree that Hagel should be confirmed and what they did was a terrible precedent, I'm just not comfortable throwing around the language that we're currently denouncing the opposition for using 6 years ago.
What 'prolonged battles over Bush's war"? Where? When? People were afraid to speak out. Recall the Dixie Chicks?
Here's John McCain's reason for voting against Hagel: (reported on DailyKos just now)
Re: #2.1
While there was some snark in there - make no mistake the left had a reason to argue against the war in Iraq - we instinctively knew that that was a lie. And jim is right - the Dixie Chicks suffered greatly for speaking the truth! Again what the right is doing is not out of moral indignation or even because there is some real tangible wrong that Chuck Hagel did - he spoke his mind and he spoke up for the truth which is what no real GOP'er does. So because he broke with "party discipline" and told the truth and their feeling are hurt they obstruct his nomination even though we are still at war, really?!
What kind of nonsense is that? These people are supposed to be adults NOT 3 year olds! Enough of their lies and obstruction.
I think we'd be wise to keep the Tar and Feathering metaphorical, Pillory them in the press, and do what we must until we can clean house in 2014.
And, yes, I think Harry Reid is now part of the problem. A little gentlemanly civility is one thing, being a doormat is quite another.
Time and again the Reps have shown that they have no shame. Until the MSM starts calling them out for this, not just saying they blocked the nomination but also showing clips of what they said during the Bush/Cheney years and proving that they have no other motive than being shipdits and blocking the president, will anything start to get done.
LOL! The corporately owned media calling out repukes...
#3.1
Exactly - why do you think that the GOTP has gotten away with their crap this long, those "corporate owned journalists" need their paychecks also....
Quite right, Benen. The GOP has long been a disgrace to this country, and the most shameful thing is that they delight in being disgraceful - they revel in it, especially when they can combine being disgraceful with the opportunity to 'hurt some people.' It has long mystified me that anyone can still crow about being a "proud Republican.' Proud of what?
It is a time of political war. It also sounds to me like a time for charges.
The level of hypocrisy and stunning disregard for their duty is stunning. I don't think have ever witnessed a situation where one party has decided that it alone has the right to make policy in this country. It's really time to start treating the Republican party as a rump organization, worthy of all the respect I have for the Know-Nothings of the 19th century. If I have to listen to Lindsay Graham or John Kyl lecture this country on "how things ought to be" I'm going to vomit. Please stop voting for these miserable troglodytes, and elect men and women who actually want to govern.
Can Obama appoint Hagel during this recess?
No
It would be risky...but the President should nominate mccain for sec. defence and see whether or not he would be confirmed. If he was not, it would shut him up for good. It would also scatter his "friends"to the farthest corners of the sinking garbage barge that is the GOP.
It is just sick. And any of you on the right reading this (shooter- I'm looking in your direction)- this is on y'all as well. They're not going to listen to the American people, they're only going to listen to you on the Right.
YOU need to get these Senators doing the right thing.
If this had been Democratic Senators blocking a decorated Republican war hero when Mr. Bush was President, y'all would have been screaming 'treason'. Now it is Republicans doing this, and if you don't now declare the same thing, then you will have lost any shred of decency or believability. You will be nothing more than a shrill, politically motivated, non-thinking American. And you'll get what you deserve if those you've put in power get their way.
Grrrr.
Gallup poll on 08.14.12. show that only 10% Americans support Congress ??? The biggest problem to move this country FASTER forward in right direction is GRIDLOCK in Congress ( economy, unemployment, houses market depression are improving). American people sent them in Congress to do what is the best for the future of USA, and NOT to play political games ( like they did in Congress during last 4 years).. Other Countries will NOT wait for us, should we move forward or continue to play political games ( ex. BRICS ). President should use more Executive orders, Veto and deadline to be more effective!!! PS. Do NOT forget that situation on top of “pyramid” is different than on the bottom…
Unfortunately, far too many people sent these jackasses to congress specificly to thwart everything the POTUS or the Democrats propose. An uneducated, stupid electorate is precisely what the Republicans thrive on.
If it was not treasonous to criticize or ridicule Commander CodPiece, it was at least dangerous. I almost get into a fight with a coworker because the day that ameriKa started war against Iraq I said "if there is a heaven and a hell, I hope that there is a special place in hell reserved for George Bush and others who start bullsh!t wars.".
In American history, a Senate minority had never blocked an up-or-down vote on a cabinet nominee -- until yesterday.
This is an incorrect statement. As I posted earlier, it happened in February 1985 as reported here by the AP:
You can re-word your claim (and the one made by Ms Maddow on the show last night) but as it is, it is incorrect. You held ORielly to task earlier on incorrect statements, why is the standard different?
I'll repost my reply that you failed to respond to on another thread.:
If filibusters occurred in those cases, as you claim, point me to the congressional record that backs that claim up, not news organizations.
Like this:
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=113&session=1&vote=00021
Now you go.
TO CONFIRM THE NOMINATION OF EDWIN MEESE III, OF CALIFORNIA, TO BE ATTORNEY GENERAL.
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/99-1985/s9
RobDon, the big difference is the Meese Nomination for AG in the 80s was a: not the Sec of Defense, and b: it wasnt during a time of war. Huge difference there.
Rollo, I responded to your earlier post. And you are correct, Meese was later confirmed and that is what is predicted will happen to Hagel.
John, I acknowledge those differences but it still does not make the statement posted in the article true, does it?
Rob, the record doesn't show that Meese was ever filibustered. That was my point.
1985 Senate 1st 9 votes (through Meese confirmation):
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes#session=269
TO CONFIRM THE NOMINATION OF EDWIN MEESE III, OF CALIFORNIA, TO BE ATTORNEY GENERAL.
Senate Vote #9
Feb 23, 1985
Aye/Nay 63/31
TO REQUEST THE ATTENDANCE OF ABSENT SENATORS.
Senate Vote #8
Feb 23, 1985
Aye/Nay 86/2
TO REQUEST THE ATTENDANCE OF ABSENT SENATORS DURING CONSIDERATION OF THE NOMINATION OF EDWIN MEESE III, OF CALIFORNIA, TO BE ATTORNEY GENERAL.
Senate Vote #7
Feb 22, 1985
Aye/Nay 88/3
TO REQUEST THE ATTENDANCE OF ABSENT SENATORS DURING CONSIDERATION OF THE NOMINATION OF EDWIN MEESE III, OF CALIFORNIA, TO BE ATTORNEY GENERAL.
Senate Vote #6
Feb 22, 1985
Aye/Nay 89/3
TO REQUEST THE ATTENDANCE OF ABSENT SENATORS DURING CONSIDERATION OF THE NOMINATION OF EDWIN MEESE III, OF CALIFORNIA, TO BE ATTORNEY GENERAL.
Senate Vote #5
Feb 22, 1985
Aye/Nay 79/2
TO CONFIRM THE NOMINATION OF DONALD P. HODEL, OF VIRGINIA, TO BE SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR.
Senate Vote #4
Feb 06, 1985
Aye/Nay 93/1
TO CONFIRM THE NOMINATION OF JOHN S. HERRINGTON, OF CALIFORNIA, TO BE SECRETARY OF ENERGY.
Senate Vote #3
Feb 06, 1985
Aye/Nay 93/1
TO CONFIRM THE NOMINATION OF WILLIAM J. BENNETT, OF NORTH CAROLINA, TO BE SECRETARY OF EDUCATION.
Senate Vote #2
Feb 06, 1985
Aye/Nay 93/0
TO CONFIRM THE NOMINATION OF JAMES A. BAKER III, OF TEXAS, TO BE SECRETARY OF THE TREASURY.
Senate Vote #1
Jan 29, 1985
Aye/Nay 95/0
@RobDon -
Your purity point being what? What are you, the unofficial ombudsman of this site? Let's just get to the question - do you believe the filibustering of the Hagel nomination to be a responsible action by the current Senate Republicans? One word answer for now, please, without reference to something that might have occurred three decades ago, or to a threatened filibuster of an Interior Secretary from 2005, which lost a cloture vote 85-8.
Here: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2013/02/15/how-unprecedented-is-the-hagel-filibuster/
Rollo, there does not have to be a vote of cloture for a filibuster to happen. It did happen. I will eventually find a little time to research the record to back up the news articles but it will not be a cloture vote. Are you contending that the filibuster never happened in 1985 with the intent of holding up the President cabinet nomination of Meese?
MCA, while my opinion is of little consequence, I don't see anything wrong with using legal leverage in politics to attempt to achieve a governing objective. So, "yes" I see it as a responsible temporary action. "No," I do not think the eventual up and down vote should be denied (which it is predicted to move forward, we will see). The elections of these Senators will determine whether it was a "responsible action." But I do get your point.
No, I am not the "unofficial ombudsman" but it is curious how recently TRMS held ORielly to task for saying something that was true but they want to make the claim that a minority of senators have never blocked a vote on an nomination. They have. One word answer from you, agreed?
Not taking sides here, but could the Democrats have achieved a filibuster by simply continuing to talk on the floor? Ye olde talking filibuster?
The article references "continued marathon floor sessions".
Okay, Rollo, I've had a few minutes to read a little more. You say there's no "record" of the filibuster of Meese which by I am now assuming you mean, there was not voting record of the filibuster. That last part would be correct because there was never a vote to stop the "debate" (the reading and speeches on the floor).
Instead there was behind the scenes work for several days to reach agreement on the farm issue which was what the Democrats were creating leverage on. After several days of filibustering, the debate was voluntarily ended (those are my words not a source) and the vote eventually moved forward.
That said, the Democrats did filibuster and hold hostage the vote of a President's cabinet nomination to achieve their own political end. That is eactly what has happened now, with the exception that a cloture vote to end debate was called and taken.
I always try to be open and consider other points. I still think there is "record" evidence of a minority block of an up or down vote on a cabinet nomination, an up or down vote that did eventually take place (and I believe the same will happen here.) Disagree?
Of course there has to be a cloture vote for a filibuster. Either that, or the opposition has to be so united (and numerous) that the vote to end debate NEVER takes place, meaning that the nomination simply cannot go forward. The whole idea of a filibuster is intertwined with cloture vote.
Mpguy, with all due respect, you are incorrect.
The cloture vote option did not even enter the Senate until 1917 and was first attempted in 1919. A cloture vote simply means that the Senate tried to end debate (or the filibuster) by a formal vote.
Sometimes the filibuster has been allowed to continue while the issues "causing" the filibuster are discussed or an attempt to end it via compromise, etc, are examined. There have been many filibusters without a formal vote to end it.
My point is that TRMS and blog are incorrect when they say that never in history has a presidential cabinet nominee up or down vote been block by the minority. It has and they are not being honest about it.
Republicans are traitors. Period.
I blame Reid. After his many promises to fix the broken fillibuster system, he punked out, and left it in place. What's the first thing the Republicants fillibuster? They should not have been able to had Reid stuck to his guns.....
I blame Reid. After his many promises to fix the broken fillibuster system, he punked out, and left it in place. What's the first thing the Republicants fillibuster? They should not have been able to had Reid stuck to his guns.....
The hypothetical should also include the fact that the Bush nominee is a Democrat.
Excellent point.
What makes this upsetting and bad (governing) are the reasons the repubs give: "he hurt our feelings; he criticized W; BENGHAZI." The Repubs seem to have withdrawn from governing. Everything is a power play. Dupe Reid, compromised on d fillabuster and look what he got. The house Repubs pronounce all sequester suggestions by the POTUS and demos "dead on arrival" (and these were only vague suggestions). And "Boner" said "no vote" on min wage! And of course they say this is all because the POTUS is not a leader; kinda hard to lead boneheads. Thank you America's "heartland ("heartless land" is more like it) and d "rebel" south!
My tangential takeaway from this is that Ed Koch was an asshat. Sorry to speak ill of the dead, but that's wha tI think.
What are the procedures for impeaching treasonous congressmen? We should pursue them post-haste!
The Republican Party is dead. Someone please call the cemetery to dig the hole. Oh wait, nevermind, they've already dug their own grave. 2014 will likely be a landslide victory for the Dems. The very wish of the Repubs, to become a one party country, is quickly approaching reality, they have literally handed the country over to the Dems. They oppose this administration for the pure sake of harrassment. They oppose stricter gun laws even when 90% of the country favors them. They oppose women's rights and protection from violence in deference to the great majority of Americans. They favor the ultra rich and corporations over the middle class. They continue to try and change our democratic republic into a theocracy, again, against our vast majority. The are against immigration and fairness, they are against a fair minimum wage, worker's rights, birth control, women's health and the list goes on ad nauseum. Patience my fellow readers, the final nails in the repubs coffin are surely being hammered by noone else than the repubs themselves.
What war, who declared war? I thought we were supposed to be out in the last term!!!!
It is shameful that the Republicans in the Senate are acting like petulant children. Obama won the election. Get over it and move on.
To Hell with the South.
When the snow was 60 ft. deep, and the dinosaurs were thrashing around looking for those last twigs to eat, do you suppose they even knew their time was over? I hope the mean hearted retardicans enjoy their final meals.
Just so one can be in the know. re: The frequency of filibusters has increased by a factor of 50 percent over the last half-century: During the 1950s there was an average of one filibuster per Congress, while the 110th Congress alone (covering 2007 and 2008) had 52 filibusters. More broadly, delaying tactics like the filibuster were used on 8 percent of major legislation in the 1960s, but they were used on 70 percent in the 110th Congress. So there's no question that the filibuster is not now being used in the same way it has been traditionally. In the last year alone the filibuster has been used by the republicans 90 percent of the time.
It would be a big a big scandal because the republicans who make it one. The democrats with Hagel sit silent and just take it