hiaasenrocks
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Nov-09-06 05:48 PM
Original message |
McCaskill on voting to confirm John Bolton: "Probably" |
|
Edited on Thu Nov-09-06 05:49 PM by hiaasenrocks
She said she would want to know more about him and ask some questions, but that she was a believer that the president gets some picks. She said she would tend to be deferential to the president on things like this.
EDIT: My source is a live interview on Hardball that just ended.
|
Change has come
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Nov-09-06 05:49 PM
Response to Original message |
hiaasenrocks
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Nov-09-06 05:59 PM
Original message |
Just happened. Live interview on Hardball. |
|
Watch the replay or check the transcript when it goes up.
|
sandrakae
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Nov-09-06 05:50 PM
Response to Original message |
2. Oh Fuck. I want my money back. |
readmoreoften
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Nov-09-06 05:50 PM
Response to Original message |
3. Good fucking god, if we play nice with these fuckheads he lose. Period. /nt |
ceile
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Nov-09-06 05:51 PM
Response to Original message |
|
I know she's been campaigning, but from where? Under a rock?!
|
William769
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Nov-09-06 05:51 PM
Response to Original message |
5. They want the hearing in December, if thats true. |
|
She won't have a say in the matter.
|
Horse with no Name
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Nov-09-06 05:52 PM
Response to Original message |
mac56
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Nov-09-06 05:52 PM
Response to Original message |
|
We're not to the confirmation stage yet. Much can change.
|
derby378
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Nov-09-06 05:52 PM
Response to Original message |
|
We need her office address and number. An e-mail address would be swell, too.
|
mmonk
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Nov-09-06 05:52 PM
Response to Original message |
|
All the quizzing and letter sending I did for the United Nations Association will probably have been a waste of time (like so much else).
|
Janice325
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Nov-09-06 05:53 PM
Response to Original message |
10. So you guys in Missouri elected her might "enlighten" her about |
|
Bolton. Just a suggestion with no snark intended.
|
quiet.american
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Nov-09-06 05:53 PM
Response to Original message |
11. I think it's still "don't give them ammunition" season. |
|
I'll wait to reserve judgment on statements like this until the 110th Congress is officially convened.
|
mvd
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Nov-09-06 05:54 PM
Response to Original message |
12. Why couldn't she have said "no comment yet?" |
|
Is she known as a conservative Dem? I believe Tester and Webb seems like good Democrats at heart.
|
Snotcicles
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Nov-09-06 05:55 PM
Response to Original message |
13. I hope she won't start Jean Schmidting on everybody. |
|
Edited on Thu Nov-09-06 05:57 PM by Snotcicles
We need a thirty day moratorium on open pie holes for the newbies.
|
KayLaw
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Nov-09-06 05:58 PM
Response to Original message |
|
Better write some letters.
|
madfloridian
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Nov-09-06 05:58 PM
Response to Original message |
15. The election is over....we swallowed all the stuff...no more. |
|
I think now we have the right, after being on board in 04 and 06, to stand up and holler over stuff like this.
They as candidates are given positions to take. It is showing now.
|
KharmaTrain
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Nov-09-06 05:59 PM
Response to Original message |
16. Bolton Doesn't Stand A Chance |
|
A different playing field coming up here folks. Hopefully McCaskill doesn't get seated on the Judiciary committee so she may never get to vote on Bolton's fate. With Leahy, Levin and Biden at the helm of major committees now, they control the process and that's all that counts. Repugnicans like Specter and Voinovich no longer have the tight leash of Rove and Frist around them and they can read the Tea leaves. If you think Liebermann's gonna be a pain in our ass, just wait til you see Specter get some payback for all the hoop jumping he had to do to keep his Judiciary chairmanship. He may actually become the Senator from Scotland.
Kos has the list of Senate seats coming up in '08. There are a lot of Repugnicans who are in blue or blue-leaning areas and aren't gonna hitch their wagons to people and issues that poll in the 30's.
|
wryter2000
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Nov-09-06 06:32 PM
Response to Reply #16 |
|
Oh, God, I hope he's ready to tell the puppet masters to STFU.
|
Tierra_y_Libertad
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Nov-09-06 06:00 PM
Response to Original message |
17. Politics, and politicians, as usual. |
Ignacio Upton
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Nov-09-06 06:01 PM
Response to Original message |
18. His hearing will likely be in the lameduck Congress |
|
So she probably won't have a say in the matter.
|
Selatius
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Nov-09-06 06:02 PM
Response to Original message |
19. Look, McCaskill is the best Missouri offers. Get used to it. |
|
Edited on Thu Nov-09-06 06:02 PM by Selatius
I don't mean to sound harsh, but you're damn lucky to have somebody who is even close to the liberal quadrant from the South or the Midwest in the Senate: http://www.ontheissues.org/Senate/Claire_McCaskill.htm
|
mvd
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Nov-09-06 06:04 PM
Response to Reply #19 |
20. But IMO saying this was just unnecessary |
hiaasenrocks
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Nov-09-06 06:05 PM
Response to Reply #19 |
21. Whoa. If your response was meant for the OP (me) |
|
then calm down. I didn't say I think she's wrong. Let's wait and see how the hearings go and see what she does (if the hearing even takes place when she's in office).
|
OzarkDem
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Nov-09-06 06:06 PM
Response to Reply #19 |
22. No, there are plenty of good Dems in Missouri |
|
she's not the best of the lot.
|
Selatius
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Nov-09-06 06:10 PM
Response to Reply #22 |
26. Define best, that's the big question. |
|
Edited on Thu Nov-09-06 06:11 PM by Selatius
If by best you mean the person can win the primary and get elected by the general population of a Midwestern state such as Missouri, then McCaskill is the best. That's how I defined it, and the vote count backs it up, too. If by best you mean liberal, then I'm sure there are people far better than McCaskill. Your only problem is they're blocked by a more conservative population.
|
OzarkDem
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Nov-09-06 06:20 PM
Response to Reply #26 |
32. Yes, best as in electable |
|
if memory serves correctly, she ran roughshod over other Dems in her primary. She created quite a divide in the state party a few years ago when she ran against the incumbent Dem governor in the primary, won, and went on to lose the race for governor to Baby Doc Blunt. She's been successful against fellow Dems because her wealthy husband and his friends put a lot of money into her primary campaigns against Dems.
I'm glad she was elected, but she will have to be watched.
|
Selatius
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Nov-09-06 06:22 PM
Response to Reply #32 |
33. Oh, so she can augment her campaigning power with a large wallet, huh? |
|
One day we will pass a federal clean elections law like Arizona and Maine have passed for their state legislatures.
|
OzarkDem
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Nov-09-06 06:34 PM
Response to Reply #33 |
36. It helped her at one time |
|
but no doubt her most recent race required a massive infusion of funds from the DSCC and DNC. She has to be a team player now.
|
benddem
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Nov-09-06 06:07 PM
Response to Original message |
23. they are going to vote on Bolton |
|
or at least * wants to in this session. McCaskill doesn't get sworn in till Jan. when Dems control the house...and then there is no chance he will come up for nomination...or if he does bring him up after Jan. it won't pass.
|
OzarkDem
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Nov-09-06 06:10 PM
Response to Reply #23 |
25. Surprising they would ask her that question |
|
even more surprising that she answered it.
Someone needs to have a talk with her to remind her how much money was invested by Dems in her race.
|
solara
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Nov-09-06 06:07 PM
Response to Original message |
24. This makes me feel ill |
|
McCaskill said she will be deferential on things like this. I hope that doesn't include his nominations for Supreme Court as well. Junior doesn't deserve any deference just because he holds the office of President, which he has thoroughly defiled. So, why does the he "get some picks"?
Holy merde! Bolton is devisive, narrow minded and arrogant...just like Junior. What a perfect 'pick' to be Ambassador to the U.N. -especially when we are trying to build new bridges with the world. Yeah, appeasement is just what this administration needs. :sarcasm:
Wasn't she just elected? Geez
|
Ignacio Upton
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Nov-09-06 06:11 PM
Response to Reply #24 |
27. We will be able to kill justices in committee |
Neecy
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Nov-09-06 06:14 PM
Response to Original message |
28. I'm not worried (yet) |
|
She knows that the question was a freebie, because she won't have a vote on this. This was a throwaway for Southern Missouri - and that's fine. No harm, no foul.
Her voting record probably won't be perfect, but put her against Mary Landrieu and she'll look like a flaming liberal. She's smart and she'll do what's right. Remember, she didn't come from the House - she was a State Auditor. It's going to take her some time on certain national issues. She'll be fine.
|
kerry-is-my-prez
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Nov-09-06 06:15 PM
Response to Original message |
29. It was obvious whe knew very little about it.... I think she'll vote w/Dem leadership. |
Hamlette
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Nov-09-06 06:19 PM
Response to Original message |
30. is she on the committee? Can he get out of the committee? |
|
if not, it doesn't matter...or is a damned good reason not to put her on the committee.
|
fooj
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Nov-09-06 06:19 PM
Response to Original message |
31. Chaffee just said that he wouldn't confirm. |
|
Don't sweat it. All is well re: Bolton. He'll never get the position.
|
shance
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Nov-09-06 06:24 PM
Response to Original message |
34. Here's proof we can't look to Washington for change. Its up to us. |
|
McCaskill has just revealed she's working for someone else other than her constituents.
Why in the world would she vote for such an obvious abuser?
|
solara
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Nov-09-06 06:39 PM
Response to Reply #34 |
37. Ok I am seeing a trend in my own thinking here |
|
Edited on Thu Nov-09-06 06:40 PM by solara
I am still paranoid. I guess that is one of the legacies from the past 6 years. Winning both houses almost seems too good to be true, so I guess I am hyper sensitive to seeing anything that may 'seem' off course.
Right now anything that looks like a back flip is going to set me off. So I am going to slow down, take a deep breath and just pay attention. January is a few months off, and no telling what Junior is gonna try to pull off while he still can. I will keep my eyes on that..
Until there is something definitive, I just have to trust that the people who are going to be sworn in are better than the people they replaced.
|
Vidar
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Nov-09-06 06:39 PM
Response to Original message |
38. Luckily, Chafee is fighting this even in his defeat. |
in_cog_ni_to
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Nov-09-06 06:41 PM
Response to Original message |
39. He will NOT be confirmed. n/t |
LittleClarkie
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Nov-09-06 06:56 PM
Response to Original message |
40. Give her a break. She's not even in office yet. Let her take a look at the issues |
hiaasenrocks
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Nov-09-06 06:57 PM
Response to Reply #40 |
42. Don't get hysterical. |
|
I just posted the news. I didn't say I disagreed with her at this point.
|
LittleClarkie
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Nov-09-06 06:58 PM
Response to Reply #42 |
|
And I was talking mostly to the people in the thread who are freaking.
|
WI_DEM
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Nov-09-06 06:57 PM
Response to Original message |
Clarkie1
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Nov-09-06 07:02 PM
Response to Original message |
44. It's not the time to be confrontational on an issue such as this two days after the election. |
|
I don't like Bolten at all, and I think there needs to hearings on his nomination eventhough he is the incumbent ambassador. The hearings should focus on his performance at the U.N. during the time he has served.
But again, now is not the time to be confrontational on an issue such as this. Just let the process play itself out.
|
LittleClarkie
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Nov-10-06 08:56 PM
Response to Original message |
45. Sorry to dredge this up again, but I have a question |
|
why are we worried about how McCaskill will vote if the Bolton nomination will be going through the Lame Duck Congress and not the new one. I thought Bush was going to try and hammer it through before the new Congress convenes. No?
|
cool user name
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Nov-10-06 09:00 PM
Response to Original message |
46. Fuck ... another pushover. |
4theheart
(22 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Nov-10-06 09:30 PM
Response to Reply #46 |
47. Hopefully this isn't a sign of things to come but... |
|
We'll see how this plays out, she's not even in office yet. I have a feeling that the whip durbin, and many other prominent and powerful democrats are going to quickly remind her of the decisive role they played in raising money for her and getting the stem cell issue on the balot to energize her campaign. Let's give the party enforcers some time to work their magic, hell we didn't even know what that would consist of untill just a few days ago. We brought her in and we can take her out.
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Fri Apr 26th 2024, 03:19 AM
Response to Original message |