First Filibuster of SecDef Nominee in US History?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...st-filibuster/

Posted by Rachel Weiner on February 14, 2013 at 10:25 am.

Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) announced on the chamber floor Thursday morning that he has scheduled a cloture vote on Chuck Hagel's nomination as secretary of defense for Friday morning. He followed up with a statement saying that Republicans will filibuster the nomination, depriving Democrats of the 60 votes needed to end debate and hold an up-or-down vote.
"Senate Republicans have made it clear they intend to mount a full-scale filibuster, and block the Senate from holding a final passage vote on Senator Hagel's nomination," Reid said.
On the floor, he (inaccurately) warned that if Hagel is not confirmed tomorrow, we will have no secretary of defense.
"In less than two hours, our country will be without a secretary of defense," Reid said. "It's shocking that my Republican colleagues would leave the nation without a fully empowered secretary of defense."

However, the Pentagon says otherwise. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta will "stay until Sen. Hagel is confirmed," a senior defense official said. Foreign Policy reports that Panetta leaving for California on Thursday and does not plan to come back to Washington, but he will still be the defense secretary.
Even so, Reid went on to say that NATO defense ministers are meeting next week in Brussels and that our defense secretary won't be there because "we won't have one if we don't get this thing done this week."
"There are serious consequences for this delay," he said.
Criticizing Republicans for demanding more information from Hagel and from the administration, Reid said: "This isn't a high school getting ready for a football game or some play that's being produced at a high school. We're trying to get someone to run the defense of our country." He called claims that Hagel had not been forthcoming "outlandish."
Conservative Republicans, he argued, were too concerned with tea party primary challenges.
"It is tragic that Republicans are planning to filibuster this nomination," Reid concluded. "It's really tragic."
The cloture motion was filed Wednesday afternoon.

Dammit Reid. You need to get it together. The GoP has.

The GOP has become a symbolic cockblock to getting anything done.

Didn't Hagel have some serious issues people were concerned with?

So Reid lied in order to try to get what he wants. Thats no shock.

Fire. Them. All.

Originally Posted by Act of God

Didn't Hagel have some serious issues people were concerned with?

Yea, he wasn't a chicken-hawk.

Originally Posted by Xcelratr

So Reid lied in order to try to get what he wants. Thats no shock.

Fire. Them. All.

I support this

Funny how the GOP had no problem with him when he was a Republican senator but once Hussein nominated him he was persona non gratis. The GOP is truly pathetic, that's why they'll be denied the Presidency again in 2016 and most likely 2020.

Originally Posted by that_one_guy

Funny how the GOP had no problem with him when he was a Republican senator but once Hussein nominated him he was persona non gratis. The GOP is truly pathetic, that's why they'll be denied the Presidency again in 2016 and most likely 2020.

I'm really intrigued that the dems keep saying this. Would be interesting and ironic to see the Republicans win the presidency in 2016/2020.

Originally Posted by that_one_guy

Funny how the GOP had no problem with him when he was a Republican senator but once Hussein nominated him he was persona non gratis. The GOP is truly pathetic, that's why they'll be denied the Presidency again in 2016 and most likely 2020.

The sad truth is that there is a large chunk of the population that would prefer that be the case REGARDLESS of how our economy does over the next 4/8 years. People need to start bickering and whining about nonsensical cr@p and focus on getting our economy back on track.

Originally Posted by Act of God

Didn't Hagel have some serious issues people were concerned with?

There are a couple. The Jewish community/lobbyists see him as anti-Isreal because of a comment he made stating, "I'm not an Israeli Senator, I'm a US Senator." That was his response to a question about Jewish lobbyist influence in US politics. Some Republicans, including McCain, don't like his stance with Iran where Hagel would prefer direct negotiations where others don't . There are some other things as well.

Originally Posted by MDydinanM

There are a couple. The Jewish community/lobbyists see him as anti-Isreal because of a comment he made stating, "I'm not an Israeli Senator, I'm a US Senator." That was his response to a question about Jewish lobbyist influence in US politics. Some Republicans, including McCain, don't like his stance with Iran where Hagel would prefer direct negotiations where others don't . There are some other things as well.

That's a patriot's quote, I already like him!

Author's name is Weiner. I lol'd.

Sent from my HTC Glacier using Bimmer App

Originally Posted by Act of God

That's a patriot's quote, I already like him!

Seems like certain politicians have it out for him and there is something still outstanding in regards to financial disclosure. The Washington Post calls his disclosure "skimpy". http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...r-chuck-hagel/

I think there is concern over foreign government contributions to him.

I really don't have an opinion so far.

Originally Posted by MDydinanM

I really don't see the what all the hub-bub is with him. Seems like certain politicians have it out for him and there is something still outstanding in regards to financial disclosure.

I just read a little, he said the state department is controlled by Israel. I like this guy.

He may register as a republican, but he's another "yes-man" for President Obama.

Look at how quickly his stance on Iran and Israel changed.

Originally Posted by NOVAbimmer

He may register as a republican, but he's another "yes-man" for President Obama.

Look at how quickly his stance on Iran and Israel changed.

He has been criticized about his perceived Israeli views before Obama's presidency.

Secondly, I would venture to say for a person to become SecDef, one would have to agree with the President's views. Otherwise you likely won't be nominated. That goes for both parties.

If he had had even one or two good straight answers in his confirmation hearing, I'd have a shred of support for him.

Originally Posted by NOVAbimmer

If he had had even one or two good straight answers in his confirmation hearing, I'd have a shred of support for him.

I haven't been following too closely to have an opinion on the matter.

His hearing was an absolute joke. If he had come back the next day asking for a mulligan because he was really drunk or really stoned, I wouldn't have been surprised in the least.

Originally Posted by Xcelratr

So Reid lied in order to try to get what he wants.

Ignore republican douchebaggery, attack Reid.