You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Reply #47: Obama has yet to make a formal offer of SoS and there must be a reason why. [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
AtomicKitten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-25-08 03:07 PM
Response to Original message
47. Obama has yet to make a formal offer of SoS and there must be a reason why.
We can only guess.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
  -NBC Legal Analyst Pete Williams Says it is Unconstitutional to Appoint Hillary SOS. hnmnf  Nov-25-08 02:48 PM   #0 
  - Any clue as to WHY it would be unconstitutional?  GodlessBiker   Nov-25-08 02:50 PM   #1 
  - I smell BS  Vincardog   Nov-25-08 02:50 PM   #2 
  - "NBC Legal Analyst "  KansDem   Nov-25-08 02:53 PM   #8 
     - Williams = legal issues reporter. Obama = Constitutional scholar/professor. (nt)  JaneQPublic   Nov-25-08 03:22 PM   #68 
        - And that's all we really need to know...(nt)  KansDem   Nov-25-08 03:32 PM   #91 
  - So Clinton steps down as senator and then is appointed  high density   Nov-25-08 02:51 PM   #3 
  - Actually, he is pushing the meme  polmaven   Nov-25-08 03:32 PM   #90 
     - Actually, he's right, it would be illegal. However, this has been skirted before.  TheWraith   Nov-25-08 11:05 PM   #143 
        - He is right.  Kalyke   Nov-26-08 11:54 AM   #162 
  - why would it be....  dennis4868   Nov-25-08 02:51 PM   #4 
  - LOL!  SIMPLYB1980   Nov-25-08 02:52 PM   #5 
  - pwned. nt  bunnies   Nov-25-08 02:53 PM   #7 
  - Pete Williams has been a pretty fair legal analyst for NBC  hnmnf   Nov-25-08 02:54 PM   #12 
  - Fair like FAUX news.  SIMPLYB1980   Nov-25-08 03:01 PM   #32 
     - Do you have evidence based on his reporting that he isnt fair?  hnmnf   Nov-25-08 03:02 PM   #34 
        - Can you find any evidence that he is fair based on his reporting?  SIMPLYB1980   Nov-25-08 03:05 PM   #41 
           - Again, A reporter is assumed neutral. Therefore the onus is on you to declare bias  hnmnf   Nov-25-08 03:09 PM   #50 
              - Here is one, but I will not waste anymore of my time researching this RW blowhard.  SIMPLYB1980   Nov-25-08 03:53 PM   #103 
  - HAHAHA  Harvey Korman   Nov-25-08 03:01 PM   #29 
  - Just because he's EVIL doesn't mean he's WRONG. n/t  IanDB1   Nov-25-08 03:19 PM   #61 
  - What is his reasoning?  ashling   Nov-25-08 02:52 PM   #6 
  - her last name is Clinton  wyldwolf   Nov-25-08 02:53 PM   #9 
  - probably the money from foreign government things her husband is into.  Whisp   Nov-25-08 02:54 PM   #10 
  - It's something to do with not being Constitutional to take someone out of the Senate and  jenmito   Nov-25-08 02:55 PM   #13 
     - No. It is about voting on a raise for the position of SOS, then becoming SOS.  No Elephants   Nov-25-08 03:51 PM   #102 
        - Exactly -- so, take the raise/advantage away, and it's okay  LostinVA   Nov-26-08 11:44 AM   #156 
  - Dude is a former employee of Dick Cheney (and you know how right he is  Lex   Nov-25-08 02:54 PM   #11 
  - Thats kind of a cop out  hnmnf   Nov-25-08 02:57 PM   #18 
  - in what respect, Charlie?  Lex   Nov-25-08 02:59 PM   #23 
     - Can you give me proof by his reporting that hes unfair to the left and favors the right?  hnmnf   Nov-25-08 03:00 PM   #27 
        - Can you prove to me that he's a neutral reporter?  Lex   Nov-25-08 03:02 PM   #33 
           - The Onus is on you my friend. A reporter is assumed to start out neutral  hnmnf   Nov-25-08 03:03 PM   #39 
              - You were the one urging us to believe him. Why should I?  Lex   Nov-25-08 03:08 PM   #48 
                 - Ok, so you have no proof.  hnmnf   Nov-25-08 03:10 PM   #51 
                    - 1. I trust Obama over Pete Williams. 2. His association with Cheney  Lex   Nov-25-08 03:13 PM   #54 
                       - Tim Russert was COS for Daniel Patrick Moynahan. That sure didnt kill his credibility  hnmnf   Nov-25-08 03:17 PM   #58 
                          - Well, we'll see what kind of credibility Williams has pretty soon, won't we?  Lex   Nov-25-08 03:22 PM   #70 
                             - So dont you think its a little unfair to pre-emptively declare he has no credibility?  hnmnf   Nov-25-08 03:24 PM   #71 
                                - He has no cred on this -- there is bipartisan precedence stretching back to 1909  LostinVA   Nov-25-08 03:27 PM   #77 
                                - He stated its unconstitutional, but often ignored.  hnmnf   Nov-25-08 03:29 PM   #85 
                                - He isn't NOW since he was OUTED  LostinVA   Nov-25-08 03:31 PM   #89 
                                - You obviously didn't see what he said today or you wouldn't have made such a statement  jenmito   Nov-25-08 05:38 PM   #133 
                                   - No, I watched it -- he said it was unconstitutional, when it patently isn't  LostinVA   Nov-26-08 11:45 AM   #158 
                                      - If you really DID watch it, you didn't understand it since HE named the other times  jenmito   Nov-26-08 07:28 PM   #167 
                                - No, because I have a perfect right to my opinion about him due  Lex   Nov-25-08 03:29 PM   #83 
                                   - Gasp! You dare to suggest that the news media is NOT always neutral???  yardwork   Nov-25-08 03:49 PM   #101 
  - Right being the operative word.  yardwork   Nov-25-08 02:58 PM   #19 
  - Since this is the 3rd time this theory has been posted, don't shoot the source  HughMoran   Nov-25-08 08:14 PM   #137 
  - Hey Pete, you forgot that Obama taught constitutional law  emulatorloo   Nov-25-08 02:55 PM   #14 
  - Except she can ...  S_E_Fudd   Nov-25-08 02:55 PM   #15 
  - Pete said that constitutional scholars say that doesnt fix things, but people just ignore it.  hnmnf   Nov-25-08 02:57 PM   #16 
     - Depends on the interpretation...  S_E_Fudd   Nov-25-08 02:57 PM   #17 
  - He cited "Article 1, Section 6" of the Constitution which says...  jenmito   Nov-25-08 02:58 PM   #20 
  - They are really stretching here, that's for sure  LostinVA   Nov-25-08 02:59 PM   #24 
  - They're just pointing out the Constitution. They went on to cite 4 examples of it  jenmito   Nov-25-08 03:01 PM   #31 
     - And how many of those didn't get appointed?  S_E_Fudd   Nov-25-08 03:03 PM   #37 
     - Bingo -- if it was Kerry, there wouldn't be one thread about it one here  LostinVA   Nov-25-08 03:04 PM   #40 
     - Actually there would be 5 of them  karynnj   Nov-25-08 03:19 PM   #62 
        - Yeah, I checked: Saxe wasn't the first -- the first instance was in 1909  LostinVA   Nov-25-08 03:28 PM   #80 
           - So, there is a wealth of precedent here  karynnj   Nov-25-08 03:39 PM   #97 
              - Yes -- as recently as Bill Clinton, when Poppy helped okay Bentsen  LostinVA   Nov-26-08 11:46 AM   #159 
     - None of them, which they SAID. A LOT of things that don't usually get publicity will  jenmito   Nov-25-08 03:12 PM   #53 
     - THis has been posted over and over and over again on here -- it is NOT a big deal  LostinVA   Nov-25-08 03:03 PM   #38 
     - Why are you telling ME it's not a big deal? Did I say it IS? I didn't start  jenmito   Nov-25-08 03:15 PM   #56 
        - You just seemed to be acting like it was a bid deal  LostinVA   Nov-25-08 03:28 PM   #81 
           - In what regard, Charlie?  jenmito   Nov-25-08 03:30 PM   #86 
              - Firstly, my name isn't "Charlie," secondly, you were very insistent  LostinVA   Nov-25-08 03:31 PM   # 
                 - Um, I was quoting Sarah Palin. It was a joke which is why in my message I said  jenmito   Nov-25-08 03:38 PM   #96 
     - Just because an article of the constitution applies to her situation, as it has to others,  pampango   Nov-25-08 03:27 PM   #78 
  - Not unique to Hillary...  S_E_Fudd   Nov-25-08 02:59 PM   #25 
  - They said it wasn't unique to Hillary. They cited 4 examples. n/t  jenmito   Nov-25-08 03:03 PM   #36 
  - And Poppy Bush did his  LostinVA   Nov-25-08 03:28 PM   #82 
  - Wouldn't that disqualify all of congress from serving in a presidential cabinet then?  ShadowLiberal   Nov-25-08 10:55 PM   #142 
  - More info  ProSense   Nov-25-08 02:58 PM   #21 
  - I bet it has something to do with her birth certificate!  bunnies   Nov-25-08 02:58 PM   #22 
  - Seriesly  LostinVA   Nov-25-08 02:59 PM   #26 
     - This is HUGH  prodn2000   Nov-25-08 03:01 PM   #30 
     - No kidding.  bunnies   Nov-25-08 03:02 PM   #35 
        - This is one time I ahte being right and saying,  LostinVA   Nov-25-08 03:06 PM   #44 
  - If this is accurrate...  Shiver   Nov-25-08 03:00 PM   #28 
  - Why go through all the hassle of trying to fit a senator into this job  Sebastian Doyle   Nov-25-08 03:05 PM   #42 
  - This again? It's BULLSHIT.  onehandle   Nov-25-08 03:06 PM   #43 
  - Obama taught Constitutional Law...  Juniperx   Nov-25-08 03:06 PM   #45 
  - No, no! The sky is falling!  onehandle   Nov-25-08 03:25 PM   #72 
     - Have DUers been without goodness so long they sabotage their own happiness?  Juniperx   Nov-25-08 03:32 PM   #92 
  - Pete Williams revealed his nuttiness  Jim4Wes   Nov-25-08 03:06 PM   #46 
  - Obama has yet to make a formal offer of SoS and there must be a reason why.  AtomicKitten   Nov-25-08 03:07 PM   #47 
  - You know this how?...nt  S_E_Fudd   Nov-25-08 03:09 PM   #49 
  - A highly-placed source on a blog  LostinVA   Nov-25-08 03:11 PM   #52 
  - LOL.  Lex   Nov-25-08 03:14 PM   #55 
  - Nothing more reliable than an anonymous poster...  S_E_Fudd   Nov-25-08 03:15 PM   #57 
     - Hey, I've known them a long time and they've NEVER been wrong!  LostinVA   Nov-25-08 03:29 PM   #84 
     - Dick Cheney's former spokesperson is even more reliable, though.  yardwork   Nov-25-08 03:47 PM   #100 
  - The Obama camp has reiterated that no formal offer has been made, that the vetting process is  AtomicKitten   Nov-25-08 03:17 PM   #59 
  - Guess I missed that announcement...  S_E_Fudd   Nov-25-08 03:18 PM   #60 
     - you missed the announcement of a formal offer because there was none, not yet  AtomicKitten   Nov-25-08 04:22 PM   #126 
  - This was the only thing I could find  ProSense   Nov-25-08 03:19 PM   #63 
     - And how does this prove no formal offer has been made?...  S_E_Fudd   Nov-25-08 03:20 PM   #64 
     - Can you prove that one has been made? How do you know what has happened?  ProSense   Nov-25-08 03:22 PM   #66 
        - No...but I didn't make the claim...  S_E_Fudd   Nov-25-08 03:22 PM   #69 
           - So you're questioning someone else's opinion when you don't know anything.  ProSense   Nov-25-08 03:25 PM   #73 
              - Hmmm...  S_E_Fudd   Nov-25-08 03:30 PM   #87 
     - thanks for the link  AtomicKitten   Nov-25-08 03:20 PM   #65 
        - Again...  S_E_Fudd   Nov-25-08 03:22 PM   #67 
           - It's political theater, a dance. No worries, you can think whatever you want.  AtomicKitten   Nov-25-08 03:26 PM   #76 
              - And you know this how?...nt  S_E_Fudd   Nov-25-08 03:34 PM   #95 
                 - Obama is holding the Secretary of Commerce nomination.  AtomicKitten   Nov-25-08 03:39 PM   #98 
                    - I don't know what it meams...  S_E_Fudd   Nov-25-08 03:46 PM   #99 
                    - "indicate your statements are opinion and speculation" What are you trying to prove?  ProSense   Nov-25-08 03:56 PM   #105 
                    - She didn't state an opinion...  S_E_Fudd   Nov-25-08 04:00 PM   #107 
                    - here's a link that was posted on Huffington Post  AtomicKitten   Nov-25-08 04:02 PM   #109 
                       - Here's one for you...one that's not almost a week old...  S_E_Fudd   Nov-25-08 04:03 PM   #110 
                       - expects to if she passes the vetting process which is still in progress  AtomicKitten   Nov-25-08 04:05 PM   #112 
                          - In your opinion right?  S_E_Fudd   Nov-25-08 04:06 PM   #113 
                          - Again, please feel free to believe whatever you want.  AtomicKitten   Nov-25-08 04:10 PM   #115 
                             - Really...  S_E_Fudd   Nov-25-08 04:10 PM   #116 
                                - really, you can believe whatever you want, but be sure to clap loud enough for Tinkerbelle  AtomicKitten   Nov-25-08 04:14 PM   #120 
                          - Really? It is?  S_E_Fudd   Nov-25-08 04:09 PM   #114 
                             - sounds like the same blog chatter you & yours were dissing upthread  AtomicKitten   Nov-25-08 04:14 PM   #118 
                                - But I didn't claim them as fact...  S_E_Fudd   Nov-25-08 04:15 PM   #121 
                                   - "on track" in vetting does not equal a formal offer. Sorry. I know how much you want to believe.  AtomicKitten   Nov-25-08 04:19 PM   #124 
                                   - >>>>>> Hey, where's that link to Obama formally offering (nominating) Clinton for SoS?  AtomicKitten   Nov-25-08 08:07 PM   #136 
                                      - Are you purposely being obtuse?  S_E_Fudd   Nov-26-08 07:21 AM   #148 
                                         - So, where's the link? You adamantly disagreed that no formal offer had been made.  AtomicKitten   Nov-26-08 11:39 AM   #153 
                                            - C'mon...  S_E_Fudd   Nov-26-08 11:54 AM   #163 
                                            - So you've got nothing, right? Check.  AtomicKitten   Nov-26-08 11:56 AM   #164 
                                            - With reference to my previous post...  S_E_Fudd   Nov-26-08 12:01 PM   #165 
                       - Honestly.... HOW did the Obama camp not see this coming?  WildEyedLiberal   Nov-26-08 12:10 AM   #144 
                          - It turns out the Clinton camp fabricated the SoS offer. Link inside:  AtomicKitten   Nov-26-08 01:14 AM   #146 
                             - I suspected that from the beginning  WildEyedLiberal   Nov-26-08 01:41 AM   #147 
                                - Even more mind-numbing are those  AtomicKitten   Nov-26-08 11:52 AM   #161 
                    - It means, to me, that Obama is announcing, (or leaking,) his picks in waves.  prodn2000   Nov-25-08 03:55 PM   #104 
  - The offer has been made. The announcement will be after Thanksgiving.  onehandle   Nov-25-08 03:27 PM   #79 
     - Vetting comes BEFORE the formal offer, and she is still knee-deep in vetting.  AtomicKitten   Nov-25-08 03:34 PM   #94 
  - Frankly, I don't give a damn anymore.  Beacool   Nov-25-08 03:25 PM   #74 
  - If HRC accepts the position, the "Saxe Fix" will kick in -- it's a Dem Congress  LostinVA   Nov-25-08 03:25 PM   #75 
  - This probably explains why. Axelrod said the Commerce Secretary wouldn't be named this week  BrentTaylor   Nov-25-08 03:31 PM   #88 
  - We just need to wait 24 "business hours."  prodn2000   Nov-25-08 03:33 PM   #93 
  - msnbc lady says they can just go back to the old pay rate  Truth Hurts A Lot   Nov-25-08 03:58 PM   #106 
  - From what I read it does mean that Clinton is inelegible, however...  last1standing   Nov-25-08 04:00 PM   #108 
  - You arent appointed President, you are elected.  hnmnf   Nov-25-08 04:03 PM   #111 
     - unless you're *  northernlights   Nov-25-08 04:14 PM   #119 
     - 'Appointed' is a somewhat elastic term in that respect.  last1standing   Nov-25-08 04:16 PM   #122 
  - It's true - but Obama can get around it the way others have if he wants to.  polichick   Nov-25-08 04:12 PM   #117 
  - I saw that too.  ErinBerin84   Nov-25-08 04:16 PM   #123 
  - It's called the Saxbe Fix  oktoberain   Nov-25-08 04:20 PM   #125 
  - I didn't know about either things, myself.  GreenPartyVoter   Nov-25-08 04:23 PM   #127 
  - "Obama would be going against the constitution." It's funny, I said in a thread days ago that  MetricSystem   Nov-25-08 04:40 PM   #128 
  - I'm not into shooting the messenger but it figures you would  cat_girl25   Nov-25-08 04:51 PM   #129 
  - If thats the Constitution Obama and Hillary should respect it. We can't bash Bush and his cronies  BrentTaylor   Nov-25-08 04:51 PM   #130 
  - Well said. We don't want to be guilty of the dreaded "hypocrisy",  pampango   Nov-26-08 07:39 AM   #149 
  - Why am I not surprised this  laugle   Nov-25-08 04:53 PM   #131 
  - Article 2, Section 73, Clause 14 says you and Pete Williams should go fly a kite  mtnsnake   Nov-25-08 04:59 PM   #132 
  - If Pete lived in CA, he couldn't get married.  Rockholm   Nov-25-08 05:44 PM   #134 
  - Actually, the SoS is not appointed, merely nominated  KamaAina   Nov-25-08 06:30 PM   #135 
  - Pete Williams is a Cheney asset.  TexasObserver   Nov-25-08 08:53 PM   #138 
  - I thought Pete was the pentagon correspondent? Former Chney staff?  bluedawg12   Nov-25-08 09:35 PM   #139 
  - News Flash!  Jamastiene   Nov-25-08 10:17 PM   #140 
  - Pete Williams vs Barack Obama  grantcart   Nov-25-08 10:29 PM   #141 
  - I'd be disappointed if Obama used a shenanigan to go around the constitution.  dkf   Nov-26-08 12:26 AM   #145 
  - lol,saw it coming from a mile away.  sufrommich   Nov-26-08 07:50 AM   #150 
  - ROFLMAO!!!!!!!  OPERATIONMINDCRIME   Nov-26-08 09:56 AM   #151 
  - The "Saxe Fix" is a shenanigan now?  LostinVA   Nov-26-08 10:04 AM   #152 
  - Yes, he must preserve the constitution at all costs.  JVS   Nov-26-08 11:44 AM   #157 
  - Can't she just resign her senate seat and the accept the SOS job?  chimpsrsmarter   Nov-26-08 11:40 AM   #154 
  - No -- it's written so that can't happen  LostinVA   Nov-26-08 11:43 AM   #155 
  - Wow, Look At All The Recs For This Thread!  Dinger   Nov-26-08 11:48 AM   #160 
  - What, no recs?  pecwae   Nov-26-08 12:06 PM   #166 
 

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC