HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Hey purists: there's NO W...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Wed Jan 4, 2012, 09:26 PM

Hey purists: there's NO WAY Obama could have recess appointed Elizabeth Warren to head CFPB

NO WAY. The REPUBLICANS would have BLOCKED IT.

Now we have a SUCCESSFUL appointment, thanks to our president's FAR-SIGHTED and POLITICALLY-REALISTIC moves.

So pull your heads out of your butts and drink a BIG STEAMING CUP OF REALITY.

72 replies, 8114 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 72 replies Author Time Post
Reply Hey purists: there's NO WAY Obama could have recess appointed Elizabeth Warren to head CFPB (Original post)
MannyGoldstein Jan 2012 OP
racaulk Jan 2012 #1
FarLeftFist Jan 2012 #61
Brickbat Jan 2012 #2
TheWraith Jan 2012 #3
MannyGoldstein Jan 2012 #6
frylock Jan 2012 #59
RC Jan 2012 #16
joshcryer Jan 2012 #24
RC Jan 2012 #30
joshcryer Jan 2012 #36
MannyGoldstein Jan 2012 #38
joshcryer Jan 2012 #41
rhett o rick Jan 2012 #46
joshcryer Jan 2012 #49
rhett o rick Jan 2012 #51
joshcryer Jan 2012 #55
CakeGrrl Jan 2012 #54
SidDithers Jan 2012 #62
DJ13 Jan 2012 #4
lonestarnot Jan 2012 #5
ecstatic Jan 2012 #7
Lisa D Jan 2012 #8
AnotherMcIntosh Jan 2012 #69
bluestate10 Jan 2012 #9
joshcryer Jan 2012 #10
MannyGoldstein Jan 2012 #12
JI7 Jan 2012 #13
Dewey Finn Jan 2012 #17
MannyGoldstein Jan 2012 #22
Dewey Finn Jan 2012 #66
joshcryer Jan 2012 #20
MannyGoldstein Jan 2012 #26
joshcryer Jan 2012 #33
MannyGoldstein Jan 2012 #40
joshcryer Jan 2012 #42
joshcryer Jan 2012 #47
Terra Alta Jan 2012 #11
MannyGoldstein Jan 2012 #18
JTFrog Jan 2012 #14
MannyGoldstein Jan 2012 #15
JTFrog Jan 2012 #21
MFrohike Jan 2012 #19
Major Hogwash Jan 2012 #25
MannyGoldstein Jan 2012 #27
MFrohike Jan 2012 #43
MannyGoldstein Jan 2012 #53
slay Jan 2012 #57
JoePhilly Jan 2012 #23
Lisa D Jan 2012 #28
JohnnyRingo Jan 2012 #29
girl gone mad Jan 2012 #50
PragmaticLiberal Jan 2012 #52
Ikonoklast Jan 2012 #65
Dewey Finn Jan 2012 #67
JohnnyRingo Jan 2012 #70
JDPriestly Jan 2012 #31
Robb Jan 2012 #32
joshcryer Jan 2012 #34
JohnnyRingo Jan 2012 #35
MannyGoldstein Jan 2012 #37
joshcryer Jan 2012 #39
Missy Vixen Jan 2012 #45
joshcryer Jan 2012 #48
SidDithers Jan 2012 #63
girl gone mad Jan 2012 #44
Canuckistanian Jan 2012 #56
joshcryer Jan 2012 #60
onenote Jan 2012 #58
fishwax Jan 2012 #64
ProSense Jan 2012 #68
mmonk Jan 2012 #71
PhoenixAbove Jan 2012 #72

Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Wed Jan 4, 2012, 09:27 PM

1. This will go well. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to racaulk (Reply #1)

Wed Jan 4, 2012, 11:33 PM

61. Rather her run for Senate in case we lose Nelson's seat, she will most likely beat Brown.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Wed Jan 4, 2012, 09:28 PM

2. Heh.


K&R.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Wed Jan 4, 2012, 09:30 PM

3. I'm sure the fact that she said she didn't want it had NOTHING to do with it. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TheWraith (Reply #3)

Wed Jan 4, 2012, 09:32 PM

6. GOOD POINT!!! Please remind us all of the link to here statement so that

the PURISTS will see how RIDICULOUS, PUNY and INCREASINGLY IRRELEVANT they are.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Reply #6)

Wed Jan 4, 2012, 11:28 PM

59. gold, jerry..

GOLD!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TheWraith (Reply #3)

Wed Jan 4, 2012, 09:46 PM

16. She did want it. She did the hard work of putting it together.

 

And she did want to be the first director to make sure it go off the ground and going properly.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RC (Reply #16)

Wed Jan 4, 2012, 09:53 PM

24. She might have wanted it before we gave her an obstructing congress, but after that, it was clear...

...that she wasn't going to get anywhere with a congress that has repeatedly tried to neuter it. There's no evidence that she moved on to greener pastures not under her own volition, and with a greater vision than sitting as a chief for an agency that will be obstructed for years.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to joshcryer (Reply #24)

Wed Jan 4, 2012, 09:59 PM

30. The Republicans knew she would do a good job and did everything they could to block her nomination.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RC (Reply #30)

Wed Jan 4, 2012, 10:08 PM

36. The Republicans hate the CFPB and Warren would've been obstructed for years.

They would've subpoenaed her every other week, for years. Rather than sit and wait for the American people to elect sane politicians, she decided to get elected herself.

Now there are 44 senators who just want to say, ďYou know, we donít like that outcome. So we want to change it. We want you to rip the arms and legs off this agency.Ē Um, my answer is no. The agency is here to do a job, a job that desperately needs to be done, a job that Republicans and Democrats and libertarians and people who donít care about politics at all care about ó and that is being able to read their financial contracts, know what the price is, know what the risk is, not be overwhelmed with unreadable fine print. Thatís what weíre headed toward and thatís what I want to see happen.

...

No, what they want to do is they just want to slow this thing up. They want to find another way to see if they can complicate it and keep it from moving forward and mire it in fighting. Let me be clear: There are more restrictions on this agency than any of the other banking regulators. We already have restrictions on our budget that none of the others have. Weíre subject to a veto. No other agency, so far as I know, in government who can be vetoed by other agencies.


http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2011/07/exit-interview-elizabeth-warren-im-not-through-throwing-rocks/

This is a woman who is a fighter and I'm tired of people speaking for Warren.

She might've wanted it.

In the end she did not want it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to joshcryer (Reply #36)

Wed Jan 4, 2012, 10:12 PM

38. And Warren said this herself? Or was someone speaking for her?

Oh, the irony.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Reply #38)

Wed Jan 4, 2012, 10:17 PM

41. The quoted words are hers. Do you think she wanted to run a neutered organization?

Please spare me.

I just want to be really clear about this: The reason we have an agency is because President Obama stood behind it. And all those fights and all those compromises that were put on the table over the last couple of years, he said no ó strong independent consumer agency. The reason we donít have a good strong director in place right now ó whether itís me or somebody else ó I lay directly at the feet of those in Congress who voted against this agency to begin with and who are doing everything they can to stick a stick in the spokes to keep the wheels from turning.

...

I donít know. I mean, itís a hard question. Iíll just put it this way. I threw rocks before I ever got to this town and Iím not through throwing rocks now. So if thereíre folks who donít like what I do, so be it, but Iím still ready to fight.


This is not a woman scorn by Obama, this is a woman agitated by the obstructionists in Congress, and who, when totally thrown into the political game, decided she was going to get back at them in the best way possible.

Run for Senate.

Run for Presidency.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to joshcryer (Reply #36)

Wed Jan 4, 2012, 10:24 PM

46. Let me get this straight. We shouldnt appoint anyone the republicons dont like because

they will obstruct them??? So we appoint people that they like?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #46)

Wed Jan 4, 2012, 10:28 PM

49. No, she was never nominated, she was appointed to run a new agency. The agency itself...

...was very much obstructed, in every way imaginable. She could've dealt with the nomination, that's no big deal. She had already spent all that time dealing with the obstructionists. But she wanted to continue fighting on the other side, as a politician as opposed to an obstructed agency head.

Appoint whoever you want.

Don't be annoyed when the person who built the agency and who spent many hours a day trying to get things done but was obstructed at every move decides they don't want to run it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to joshcryer (Reply #49)

Wed Jan 4, 2012, 10:37 PM

51. Your post #36 implies that she shouldnt have been nominated because of the

trouble the republicons would have caused. If I misunderstood, I apologize. My point is that we should keep good people out of positions just because the republicons dont like it. In fact that's when we should do it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #51)

Wed Jan 4, 2012, 11:07 PM

55. We don't really know how it went down in the back room discussions.

She might've said that she actually did want to run it, personally, I can give that to anyone who wants her to have been running it, but I suspect she was given the option that she could run for Senate, and she said, "You know what, let's do it." Her Exploratory Committee was launched a whole month after the CFPB was launched. In political time frames that is very short. She had already made that decision before Cordray got the nod, you don't run a Senatorial campaign lightly, it wasn't as if "Oh, I'm not picked, I'll run for Senate." In fact, she had hinted, when Cordray was nominated, that she was going to run a Senate campaign:

I left Washington, but I donít plan to stop fighting for middle class families. I spent years working against special interests and have the battle scars to show it Ė and I have no intention of stopping now. It is time for me to think hard about what role I can play next to help rebuild a middle class that has been hacked at, chipped at, and pulled at for more than a generationóand that that is under greater strain every day.

In the weeks ahead, I want to hear from you about the challenges we face and how we get our economy growing again. I also want to hear your ideas about how we can fix what all of us Ė regardless of party Ė know is a badly broken political system. In Washington, I saw up close and personal how much influence special interests have over our law-making, and I saw just how hard it is for families to be heard. I want to hear your thoughts about how we can make sure that our voices Ėour families, our friends, and our neighbors ó are heard again.

We have a lot of work to do in our commonwealth and our country. We need to rebuild our economy family by family and block by block. We need to create new jobs and to fix our broken housing market. We need to make sure that there is real accountability over Wall Street and that the greed and recklessness that created the last financial crisis do not create the next one. We need to restore the hope of a secure retirement and the promise of a good education. We need to stop measuring our economy by profits and executive compensation at our largest companies and start measuring it by how many families can stand securely in the middle class.

I am glad to be back home. And Iím looking forward to discussing with you what we can accomplish together.


That was about 2 weeks after Cordray was picked, around two weeks later she launched her campaign. Again, in political time frames this is a very short period of time, for her to just have made that decision. It was well planned and orchestrated.

I find Warren to be a fighter, and I think she sat down, saw what her options were, and decided that ultimately she didn't want to have to deal with the headaches of having a neutered organization that had to have its hand held. Her rhetoric after she stepped down from the agency (the very agency that she built) is very strong, she's going to "keep throwing rocks," as she said.

So I'm not convinced that her path in life is not a chosen path, that she purposefully and willingly chose on her own volition.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TheWraith (Reply #3)

Wed Jan 4, 2012, 11:03 PM

54. Yeah, there's that little detail.

People sure have selective knowledge.

Guess that's what you have to do to hold a grudge.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TheWraith (Reply #3)

Wed Jan 4, 2012, 11:52 PM

62. Don't confuse 'em with facts...

it messes with their righteous indignation.

Sid

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Wed Jan 4, 2012, 09:31 PM

5. What are you talking about? She has to clean up after little Snottiescottie.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Wed Jan 4, 2012, 09:33 PM

7. She has moved on, and so should you nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Wed Jan 4, 2012, 09:35 PM

8. Who are the Purists? n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Lisa D (Reply #8)

Thu Jan 5, 2012, 04:46 AM

69. I think that he means those who value principles over principals.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Wed Jan 4, 2012, 09:37 PM

9. They can't pull their heads out of their butts.

With the butt muscles slammed shut like powerful steel traps. Look, you can't convince extremists, regardless of extreme Left or extreme Right.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Wed Jan 4, 2012, 09:37 PM

10. She didn't want it, Barny Frank said as much, and her Senate run proves she didn't want it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to joshcryer (Reply #10)

Wed Jan 4, 2012, 09:40 PM

12. She had ample opportunity to say it herself.

I'm not sure how running for the Senate once unemployed demonstrates her not wanting to run CFPB.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Reply #12)

Wed Jan 4, 2012, 09:41 PM

13. yeah, she just decided since she has no job she might as well run for Senate

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Reply #12)

Wed Jan 4, 2012, 09:47 PM

17. Maybe Ms. Warren never attended the "never an unspoken thought" school.

 

Unless some people I can think of...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Dewey Finn (Reply #17)

Wed Jan 4, 2012, 09:52 PM

22. Good point, here's some videos demonstrating her shy side

&feature=fvsr

&feature=related

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Reply #22)

Thu Jan 5, 2012, 12:13 AM

66. So you believe that

 

"never an unspoken thought" equals "not shy"?

Next time you think a light bulb has gone on over your head, check again. It might just be a tiny balloon full of hot air.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Reply #12)

Wed Jan 4, 2012, 09:50 PM

20. Did you *see* the Oversite Committee for Warren? She did *not* have to put up with their garbage...

...and she is more suited toward a Senatorial and finally a Presidential run in 2016. Her road map is not being a Bureau Chief who would be neutered by a right wing congress when we gave it to her.



I'm tired of this paternalist view of what Warren did or did not want to do. It's so obvious that this strong, powerful woman wants to make a difference in this country, and those who keep wanting her to have been Bureau Chief are just tearing her down.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to joshcryer (Reply #20)

Wed Jan 4, 2012, 09:56 PM

26. You don't think Ms. Warren can speak for herself?

Talk about paternalistic views... sheesh...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Reply #26)

Wed Jan 4, 2012, 10:00 PM

33. She already has.



You're just not listening and trying to tell everyone else what she wanted to do when you have no evidence for it. Because she didn't not say she wanted it that means she wanted it! Who cares if everyone in her political circles said she didn't want it!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to joshcryer (Reply #33)

Wed Jan 4, 2012, 10:12 PM

40. Great! Show us a link.

Thanks.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to MannyGoldstein (Reply #40)

Wed Jan 4, 2012, 10:25 PM

47. Just to be perfectly clear, Manny. She has *already done what she wanted to do*.

There is no telling us what she wanted to do, because she did it.

http://elizabethwarren.com/

You can try to convince us all day and all night that she wanted to sit on an agency that was being obstructed and neutered, I'm not buying that. She's a fighter!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Wed Jan 4, 2012, 09:37 PM

11. I think she's going to be more effective as MA's next Senator, anyway

would love to see her send Scotty packing

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Terra Alta (Reply #11)

Wed Jan 4, 2012, 09:49 PM

18. I hope so. My concern is that she'll

be another VCIW* like Bernie and Kucinich. However, she's got big brains, big heart, big spine, and big mouth - the whole enchilada - so I suspect that she'll kick the living crap out of knaves, like she did to Timmy Geithner, instead of just whining about them. And the only folks who'll be able to fire her our the good people of out Commonwealth, and we *like* FDR Democrats, so she'll be safe.

*Voice Crying In the Wind

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Wed Jan 4, 2012, 09:42 PM

14. Some folks just can't handle good news.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JTFrog (Reply #14)

Wed Jan 4, 2012, 09:44 PM

15. Some folks are highly amused by certain good news

A fella can't be happy and amused at the same time?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Reply #15)

Wed Jan 4, 2012, 09:50 PM

21. A fella sure can be amusing.

I'll give you that much.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Wed Jan 4, 2012, 09:49 PM

19. You should have posted this yesterday

You know, before the president pulled off a recess appointment with the senate not technically in recess. That way you wouldn't have the facts to massively undercut your case. Just a tip.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MFrohike (Reply #19)

Wed Jan 4, 2012, 09:54 PM

25. He was too busy.

Having a "BIG STEAMING CUP OF REALITY".

Gotta love Manny.
He tries.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MFrohike (Reply #19)

Wed Jan 4, 2012, 09:57 PM

27. My post is sarcasm

But a bit too dry, sorry.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Reply #27)

Wed Jan 4, 2012, 10:21 PM

43. And now I feel dumb

Whenever I try to get witty on the internet, this happens. You'd think I would have learned by now.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MFrohike (Reply #43)

Wed Jan 4, 2012, 11:01 PM

53. Don't. It's tough to tell reality from fiction on DU these days nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Reply #27)

Wed Jan 4, 2012, 11:15 PM

57. I've seen enough of your posts to know this

 

otherwise i would have had to have yelled at you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Wed Jan 4, 2012, 09:53 PM

23. And who says America doesn't manufacture anything anymore ... BEHOLD ...

... a new 2012 Manufactured Outrage Widget, fresh off the assembly line !!!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Wed Jan 4, 2012, 09:57 PM

28. Soft kitty, warm kitty,

little ball of fur;
Happy kitty, sleepy kitty,
Purr, Purr, Purr.

Oh, I'm sorry. I thought you said Purrists.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Wed Jan 4, 2012, 09:59 PM

29. Didn't you hear? He just appointed Richard Cordray

People should generally be happy with that fact.

I know there was a time Obama wouldn't make this move for the apparent want of bipartisan cooperation on other issues, but it seems to most he's reaching the end of an all too long rope in that endeavor.

I suppose it could be taken at face value that President Obama is taking partisan action to accomplish long awaited government business, or maybe one can take the cynical view that he either purposely smited Ms Warren at the time, or is using this (and other appointments) to gain inner-party support going into an election year.

The end result in either case is that Obama has stood up to a recalcitrant republican minority to get his job done for the people. Complaining about that seems a bit petty.

On edit:
I reread the intent of the original post and see the sarcastic prose, but still had fun composing a wordy reply that I'll feel free to cut & paste into the inevitable future outrage post. LOL.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JohnnyRingo (Reply #29)

Wed Jan 4, 2012, 10:29 PM

50. The sad reality is that Cordray is no Warren.

He's a reasonable enough choice, but can't hold a candle to her.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to girl gone mad (Reply #50)

Wed Jan 4, 2012, 11:01 PM

52. I think you should google Mr. Cordray.

Honestly, one could make the argument that in terms of actually cracking down on financial abuses, Warren can't hold a candle to him.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PragmaticLiberal (Reply #52)

Thu Jan 5, 2012, 12:00 AM

65. Bingo. Rich Cordray is not just some guy. He actually was in the trenches.

He has a track record, and was Warren's choice to head the agency.

Just because some here don't know anything about him, doesn't mean he has no accomplishments under his belt.

Hell, even the asshole Republicans blocking his appointment said he was extremely qualified.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to girl gone mad (Reply #50)

Thu Jan 5, 2012, 12:49 AM

67. Cordray could be the second coming of Christ intent on driving out the money lenders

 

and it still wouldn't be good enough for some. Ms. Warren was very enthusiastic about the choice. Maybe you should pay more attention to her opinions and less to the cartoon you seem to want to make of her.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to girl gone mad (Reply #50)

Thu Jan 5, 2012, 05:00 AM

70. I'm from Ohio

He's no stranger around here, and he's more than able to serve consumers.

Cordray is a five time undefeated Jeopardy champion who took on and won billion dollar cases against Bank Of America and AIG. Can your candidate do that? LOL.

It's really silly to try and bash Obama by calling Rich Cordray weak. Find something else.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Wed Jan 4, 2012, 09:59 PM

31. We need Elizabeth Warren in the Senate.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Wed Jan 4, 2012, 10:00 PM

32. This masterpiece took four edits?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Robb (Reply #32)

Wed Jan 4, 2012, 10:01 PM

34. Nice.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Robb (Reply #32)

Wed Jan 4, 2012, 10:04 PM

35. LOL

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Robb (Reply #32)

Wed Jan 4, 2012, 10:11 PM

37. If I were smarter and a better writer, then it would have taken fewer.

Thank you for making fun of my handicap.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Reply #37)

Wed Jan 4, 2012, 10:12 PM

39. Nah, it's difficult to make a sarcastic, derisive post, that maybe will pass scrutiny and has...

...no basis in reality.

WARREN 2012!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Robb (Reply #32)

Wed Jan 4, 2012, 10:23 PM

45. Wow. I smelled that from over here.

Can't wait to read your dazzling rebuttal.

Oh - you didn't write one?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Missy Vixen (Reply #45)

Wed Jan 4, 2012, 10:26 PM

48. I did. I've yet to be convinced Warren wanted to sit on a neutered organization...

...having to put up with right wing obstructionists for years.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Robb (Reply #32)

Wed Jan 4, 2012, 11:56 PM

63. ROFL!!...



Sid

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Wed Jan 4, 2012, 10:22 PM

44. Winning.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Wed Jan 4, 2012, 11:11 PM

56. She knew she'd be a lighning rod and so did Obama

So she opted to change the system from another angle. And so did Obama.

Win-win, I'd say.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Canuckistanian (Reply #56)

Wed Jan 4, 2012, 11:32 PM

60. I'm certain if she wanted to she could've got the nomination. She already fought...

...those bastards tooth and nail. Just go back and watch the Oversight Committee hearings. They were rude, despicable trolls. I think she had the strength to continue, but when push came to shove she decided her ability to effect change was in the Senate, not as a chief of an organization that was neutered to death.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Wed Jan 4, 2012, 11:21 PM

58. We feel your pain.

And kind of enjoy it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Wed Jan 4, 2012, 11:57 PM

64. she's going to make a great senator

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Thu Jan 5, 2012, 01:04 AM

68. There was no way

Just as there was no way to appoint Goodwin Liu.

"NO WAY. The REPUBLICANS would have BLOCKED IT. "

You're confusing the fact that Republicans did block it with the reality that they left a window open probably misled by the idea that he had already been given a vote on the Senate floor and his confirmation blocked, something that they never allowed with Warren.

Still, for you and everyone enjoying this alleged gotcha moment.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Thu Jan 5, 2012, 05:01 AM

71. Hey name caller. Stick it.

And we're for Cordray BTW.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Thu Jan 5, 2012, 05:04 AM

72. It's ok. I'll deal with it since I want her as my Senator. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread