HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Latest Breaking News (Forum) » Inhofe: Hagel To Be Held ...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 12:11 PM

Inhofe: Hagel To Be Held to ‘60-Vote Threshold’

Source: Defense News

A senior U.S. Senate Republican says his party intends to force Democratic leaders to come up with 60 votes to confirm Chuck Hagel as U.S. defense secretary.

“We are planning a 60-vote threshold” on the chamber floor later this week, Sen. James Inhofe, R-Okla., told Defense News on Tuesday morning.

Inhofe and other Senate Republicans oppose Hagel because of his past comments and actions concerning Israel, Iran and the use of U.S. military force. They say he is not suited to become defense secretary.

Senate Republicans have threatened to mount a filibuster once the nomination hits the Senate floor Wednesday or Thursday. The Senate Armed Services Committee will vote on the nomination later Tuesday.

Read more: http://www.defensenews.com/article/20130212/DEFREG02/302120019/Inhofe-Hagel-Held-8216-60-Vote-Threshold-8217-?odyssey=tab%7Ctopnews%7Ctext%7CFRONTPAGE

23 replies, 3003 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 23 replies Author Time Post
Reply Inhofe: Hagel To Be Held to ‘60-Vote Threshold’ (Original post)
Purveyor Feb 2013 OP
JustAnotherGen Feb 2013 #1
JoeBlowToo Feb 2013 #2
Light House Feb 2013 #3
Purveyor Feb 2013 #9
beerandjesus Feb 2013 #11
AAO Feb 2013 #13
Cali_Democrat Feb 2013 #19
Light House Feb 2013 #20
TwilightGardener Feb 2013 #4
msanthrope Feb 2013 #5
TwilightGardener Feb 2013 #8
Botany Feb 2013 #6
shagnasty Feb 2013 #7
eggplant Feb 2013 #10
AAO Feb 2013 #15
eggplant Feb 2013 #17
AAO Feb 2013 #12
Z_I_Peevey Feb 2013 #23
myrna minx Feb 2013 #14
Zorra Feb 2013 #16
Purveyor Feb 2013 #18
William769 Feb 2013 #21
TwilightGardener Feb 2013 #22

Response to Purveyor (Original post)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 12:14 PM

1. They ought to be

Ashamed of themselves but . . . what was that thing we were all hoping would happen in regards to the filibuster? Reid should have struck while the iron is hot.

I betcha these assholes try to stop the Vatican from selecting the next Pope unless they testify to Pope Benedict's whereabouts when President Obama was born. Because they are assholes like that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Purveyor (Original post)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 12:14 PM

2. This is the mad scramble to prevent any cuts to the War Department...

 

They cannot under any circumstances allow a Republican to collude with President Obama on trimming the fat.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Purveyor (Original post)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 12:19 PM

3. Thank you Mr. Reid

 

for the wonderful filibuster reform, see how well your great reform is working?

Why should anyone be surprised that this would happen?
The thugs have no shame at all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Light House (Reply #3)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 12:43 PM

9. +1 That's our 'Harry'... eom

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Light House (Reply #3)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 01:31 PM

11. A gentlemen's agreement is no good

...if you're not dealing with a gentleman!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to beerandjesus (Reply #11)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 01:55 PM

13. You'd think that would have been obvious to him by now. What a loser!

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Light House (Reply #3)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 02:47 PM

19. But the Republicans gave Harry Reid their word

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cali_Democrat (Reply #19)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 03:02 PM

20. That's right, I forgot.

 

That makes it all ok in that case.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Purveyor (Original post)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 12:19 PM

4. Is that a filibuster/cloture vote, or is that 60 votes to actually confirm? How could they

change that, since it's been simple majority in the past?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TwilightGardener (Reply #4)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 12:24 PM

5. The former, not the latter. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to msanthrope (Reply #5)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 12:30 PM

8. Thanks. Was worried that they somehow were changing the confirmation requirement.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Purveyor (Original post)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 12:24 PM

6. Thanks a lot Harry!

You and the other democrats had a chance to stop this crap but no you
got a handshake deal from Mitch McConnell who promised to play nice
from now on.

Chuck Hagel has combat experience, enlisted man experience, intel knowledge,
Pentagon knowledge, private sector experience, Washington D.C. knowledge,
and he is a republican too ...... this is not about Chuck Hagel but about trying
to hurt President Obama.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Purveyor (Original post)


Response to Purveyor (Original post)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 12:56 PM

10. I'm confused

If we have 60 for confirmation, don't we also have 60 for cloture? Or are some of the confirmation votes GOP that will obstruct until the final vote and then cross over (and thus the discrepancy)?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to eggplant (Reply #10)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 01:57 PM

15. The 60 votes is for cloture - if it gets by that, then 51 votes for confirmation.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AAO (Reply #15)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 02:15 PM

17. got it. that makes sense. thanks! n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Purveyor (Original post)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 01:53 PM

12. Vile, disgusting man. n/t

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AAO (Reply #12)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 05:26 PM

23. Inhofe is such an greasy twerp;

I can't stand the sight or sound of him. He's always willing to deliver the worst of the GOP ransom demands.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Purveyor (Original post)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 01:56 PM

14. Way to go Harry! We have an uphill battle to confirm a *Republican*.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Purveyor (Original post)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 02:07 PM

16. If republicans shoot down Hagel, the Prez should then nominate Dennis Kucinich, and

then Harry and Senate Democrats should ram through a nuke option confirmation.



That would teach republicans a much deserved lesson.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Zorra (Reply #16)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 02:31 PM

18. Wimpy Harry Reid won't do squat when it comes to the 'nuke option'. He man disgusts me to no

end.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Purveyor (Reply #18)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 05:19 PM

21. He beats that asshole Republican Homophobic anti-semite Hagel.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to William769 (Reply #21)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 05:22 PM

22. LOL.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread